Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Forced 3D Reconnection in an Exponentially Separating Magnetic Field

David N. Hosking1,2,3,*, Ian G. Abel4, and Steven C. Cowley5

  • 1Princeton Center for Theoretical Science, Princeton, New Jersey 08540, USA
  • 2Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Wilberforce Road, Cambridge CB3 0WA, United Kingdom
  • 3Gonville & Caius College, Trinity Street, Cambridge CB2 1TA, United Kingdom
  • 4Institute for Research in Electronics and Applied Physics, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742, USA
  • 5Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, Princeton, New Jersey 08540, USA

  • *Contact author: dnh26@cam.ac.uk

Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 255101 – Published 18 December, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/rd5d-93l7

Abstract

We present a solvable scenario for 3D reconnection in a sheared magnetic field. We consider a localized external force that is applied slowly to a flux tube and then maintained, generating an Alfvénic perturbation that spreads along the field lines. Separation of the sheared field lines reduces the scale of the perturbation across the field, enhancing magnetic diffusion. For a fusion-motivated equilibrium with exponential field-line separation, we find a reconnection timescale proportional to S/lnS under magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) and to S1/3 for semicollisional electron-only reconnection, where S is the Lundquist number of the perturbed flux tube. We generalize these results to arbitrary magnetic geometries, showing that the semicollisional case is geometry independent. Interestingly, we find that slower field-line separation yields an increased reconnection rate in MHD.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (34)

  1. B. B. Kadomtsev, Disruptive instability in Tokamaks, Sov. J. Plasma Phys. 1, 389 (1975), https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1975FizPl...1..710K/abstract.
  2. D. Liu, W. Fox, S. Bose, H. Ji, S. Jardin, and N. Ferraro, On discriminating tokamak sawtooth crash models via localized density and temperature measurements, Phys. Plasmas 31, 032512 (2024).
  3. A. Cathey, M. Hoelzl, K. Lackner, G. T. A. Huijsmans, M. G. Dunne, E. Wolfrum, S. J. P. Pamela, F. Orain, S. Günter et al. (JOREK Team), Non-linear extended MHD simulations of type-I edge localised mode cycles in ASDEX upgrade and their underlying triggering mechanism, Nucl. Fusion 60, 124007 (2020).
  4. C. J. Ham, S. C. Cowley, G. Brochard, and H. R. Wilson, Nonlinear ballooning modes in tokamaks: Stability and saturation, Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion 60, 075017 (2018).
  5. N. F. Loureiro and S. Boldyrev, Role of magnetic reconnection in magnetohydrodynamic turbulence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 245101 (2017).
  6. A. A. Schekochihin, MHD turbulence: A biased review, J. Plasma Phys. 88, 155880501 (2022).
  7. L. Sironi and A. Spitkovsky, Relativistic reconnection: An efficient source of non-thermal particles, Astrophys. J. Lett. 783, L21 (2014).
  8. J. F. Drake, S. K. Antiochos, S. D. Bale, B. Chen, C. M. S. Cohen, J. T. Dahlin, L. Glesener, F. Guo, M. Hoshino, S. Imada et al., Magnetic reconnection in solar flares and the near-Sun solar wind, Space Sci. Rev. 221, 27 (2025).
  9. H. P. Furth, J. Killeen, and M. N. Rosenbluth, Finite-resistivity instabilities of a sheet pinch, Phys. Fluids 6, 459 (1963).
  10. B. Coppi, R. Galvao, R. Pellat, M. Rosenbluth, and P. Rutherford, Resistive internal kink modes, Sov. J. Plasma Phys. 2, 533 (1976).
  11. D. A. Uzdensky, N. F. Loureiro, and A. A. Schekochihin, Fast magnetic reconnection in the plasmoid-dominated regime, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 235002 (2010).
  12. J. F. Drake and Y. C. Lee, Kinetic theory of tearing instabilities, Phys. Fluids 20, 1341 (1977).
  13. A. H. Boozer, Why fast magnetic reconnection is so prevalent, J. Plasma Phys. 84, 715840102 (2018).
  14. A. H. Boozer, Fast magnetic reconnection and the ideal evolution of a magnetic field, Phys. Plasmas 26, 042104 (2019).
  15. A. Lazarian, G. L. Eyink, A. Jafari, G. Kowal, H. Li, S. Xu, and E. T. Vishniac, 3D turbulent reconnection: Theory, tests, and astrophysical implications, Phys. Plasmas 27, 012305 (2020).
  16. For many equilibria (for example, toroidal equilibria with magnetic helicity), it is not possible to construct single-valued Clebsch coordinates globally. Nonetheless, single-valued coordinates can still be constructed in local patches. This is sufficient for our calculation, as the reconnection becomes increasingly localized as n→∞ [see above Eq. (5) for the definition of n].

  17. T. H. Jensen, R. K. Fisher, C. L. Hsieh, M. A. Mahdavi, V. Vanek, and T. Ohkawa, Confinement of plasma in the Doublet-II Device, Phys. Rev. Lett. 34, 257 (1975).
  18. T. E. Evans, M. E. Fenstermacher, R. A. Moyer, T. H. Osborne, J. G. Watkins, P. Gohil, I. Joseph, M. J. Schaffer, L. R. Baylor, M. Bécoulet et al., RMP ELM suppression in DIII-D plasmas with ITER similar shapes and collisionalities, Nucl. Fusion 48, 024002 (2008).
  19. M. R. Wade, R. Nazikian, J. S. deGrassie, T. E. Evans, N. M. Ferraro, R. A. Moyer, D. M. Orlov, R. J. Buttery, M. E. Fenstermacher, A. M. Garofalo et al., Advances in the physics understanding of ELM suppression using resonant magnetic perturbations in DIII-D, Nucl. Fusion 55, 023002 (2015).
  20. D. A. Ryan, C. Ham, A. Kirk, T. Markovic, S. Munaretto, L. Piron, S. Saarelma, W. Suttrop, A. J. Thornton, E. Viezzer et al., First observation of RMP ELM mitigation on MAST upgrade, Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion 66, 105003 (2024).
  21. H. R. Strauss, Nonlinear, three-dimensional magnetohydrodynamics of noncircular tokamaks, Phys. Fluids 19, 134 (1976).
  22. A. Zocco and A. A. Schekochihin, Reduced fluid-kinetic equations for low-frequency dynamics, magnetic reconnection, and electron heating in low-beta plasmas, Phys. Plasmas 18, 102309 (2011).
  23. A. A. Schekochihin, S. C. Cowley, W. Dorland, G. W. Hammett, G. G. Howes, E. Quataert, and T. Tatsuno, Astrophysical gyrokinetics: Kinetic and fluid turbulent cascades in magnetized weakly collisional plasmas, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 182, 310 (2009).
  24. We note that the semicollisional limit (collisionless ions but collisional electrons) means that these waves are immune to Landau damping.

  25. K. V. Roberts and J. B. Taylor, Gravitational resistive instability of an incompressible plasma in a sheared magnetic field, Phys. Fluids 8, 315 (1965).
  26. J. W. Connor, R. J. Hastie, and J. B. Taylor, Shear, periodicity, and plasma ballooning modes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 396 (1978).
  27. J. W. Conner, R. J. Hastie, and T. J. Martin, The stability of resistive ballooning modes in a high temperature plasma, Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion 27, 1509 (1985).
  28. J. F. Drake and T. M. Antonsen, Jr., Analytic theory of resistive ballooning modes, Phys. Fluids 28, 544 (1985).
  29. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/rd5d-93l7 for a posteriori justification of terms neglected in our asymptotic analysis (Sec. 1); late-time corrections to the MHD reconnection rate arising from resistive slippage at the origin (Sec. 2); and the early-time evolution of the reconnected flux before the applied force reaches its final, maintained value (Sec. 3).
  30. We require amplitudes to be small compared with the equilibrium scales in order for Eq. (3) to be valid for the perturbed magnetic field.

  31. Qualitatively, the effect of the modification is that decay of u˜out and J˜∥out is arrested at a nonzero value.

  32. In deriving these expressions, we have used the relations J˜∥0=Slimℓ˜→0∂u˜out/∂ℓ˜, dJ˜∥0/dt˜=limℓ˜→0u˜out, and limt˜→0u˜out∝t˜p0f0(ξ) [Eq. (14)], which together imply that dlnJ∥0/dt˜∝S−(1+2δ)/2(1+δ)t˜1/2(δ+1) as t˜→0.

  33. This dependence was inevitable as, in the case of linear shear, Eqs. (5) and (6) are isomorphic to the 2D tearing-mode equations [25].

  34. In the dimensionless units employed in the Letter, the distance that the diffusive pulse travels before reconnection occurs is (Sτ˜rec)1/2(δ+1)∼S2/(2δ+3) (obtained by setting ξ∼1 at t=τ˜rec, with |Δ′|∼1), while the distance that an Alfvén wave propagates in the same time, i.e., the causal distance, is τ˜rec∼S(2δ+1)/(2δ+3). The reconnecting solution cannot be established if the former distance is greater than the latter, which occurs for δ<1/2.

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation