Related papers: Reply to Comment: S. Das Sarma et al., arXiv:0708.…

In [arXiv:2409.00161v1 (2024)] Cavendish et al. raise three criticisms against our time of arrival proposal [L. Maccone and K. Sacha, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 110402 (2020)]. Here we show that all three criticisms are without merit. One of…

We reply to misleading claims made in a comment to our work by Birse and McGovern in arXiv:1708.09341.

Comment on Article by Ferreira and Gamerman [arXiv:1509.03410].

Comment on Article by Ferreira and Gamerman [arXiv:1509.03410].

It is shown that the recent Comment [cond-mat/0306019] by Y. Yu on the above article is not substantiated.

We reply to a recent comment by Bhattacharya et. al. (cond-mat/9812290) on our previous Letter (PRL 81, 5640 (1998)).

After our publication of the observed first indication for neutrinoless double beta decay in [KK-Evid01], a number of papers have been published [KK-Sar_Evid01,KK2-Sar_Evid01,KK3-Sar_Evid01,Ma02-Ev,Barg02-Ev,Ueh02-Ev,Mi…

It will be shown that the comment [1] contains numerous errors, misconceptions, inaccuracies, false assumptions, misunderstandings and unjustified claims. The analysis of the comment is built on a false assumption that the terminal current…

The paper comments on "Quantifying long-term scientific impact". It indicates that there is a mistake of [D. S. Wang , C. Song, A. L. Barabasi, Quantifying long-term scientific impact, Science 342, 127 (2013), arXiv:1306.3293].

This is a reply to a comment by P. Schlottmann and A.A. Zvyagin.

Statements included in the comment published by Schumann et al. (arXiv:1904.03023v1) are contradicted by documents that were communicated to one of the co-authors of the comment (Dr. Koester). These documents are reviewed but cannot be…

We regret to point out several inaccurate and misleading statements that Benedetto {\em et al.} make in their Reply to our Comment on their paper titled ``Language Trees and Zipping''.

We are pleased to see that Jeckelmann has made many changes to the original version of his comment on our paper as a result of our response. Here is a copy of this powerful response that reveals problems in his previous results. However,…

This is a reply to Professor Yehia Comments in arXiv:1305.0026

In this brief reply we point out to some misconceptions in C.Camacho's comment (cond-mat/9701210).

We remark on the validity of the concerns raised in the comment(cond-mat/0304626) by Fal'ko, Lerner, Tsyplyatyev, and Aleiner..

We show that the criticism of our paper [Phys. Rev. B 65, 125109 (2002)] by Wang, Millis, and Das Sarma [cond-mat/0206203] is based on a trivial mathematical mistake they have committed.

We respond to the recent comment [arXiv:1105.1593] on our Letter [G. G. Plunk and T. Tatsuno, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 165003 (2011)]. The comment claims that our argument for spectral transfer direction is incomplete. The comment gives an…

I respond to the Bernard et al. comment on my letter ``Chiral anomalies and rooted staggered fermions.''

Withdrawn by arXiv administration because authors have forged affiliations and acknowledgements, and have not adequately responded to charges [hep-th/9912039] of unattributed use of verbatim material.