Paper detail

The alpha-effect in rotating convection: a comparison of numerical simulations

Numerical simulations are an important tool in furthering our understanding of turbulent dynamo action, a process that occurs in a vast range of astrophysical bodies. It is important in all computational work that comparisons are made between different codes and, if non-trivial differences arise, that these are explained. Kapyla et al (2010: MNRAS 402, 1458) describe an attempt to reproduce the results of Hughes & Proctor (2009: PRL 102, 044501) and, by employing a different methodology, they arrive at very different conclusions concerning the mean electromotive force and the generation of large-scale fields. Here we describe why the simulations of Kapyla et al (2010) are simply not suitable for a meaningful comparison, since they solve different equations, at different parameter values and with different boundary conditions. Furthermore we describe why the interpretation of Kapyla et al (2010) of the calculation of the alpha-effect is inappropriate and argue that the generation of large-scale magnetic fields by turbulent convection remains a problematic issue.

preprint2011arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.