Related papers: Reply to Comment: S. Das Sarma et al., arXiv:0708.…
This is a reply to the comment from E. Amselem et al. on our paper (Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 150401 (2012), arXiv:1207.0059).
The goal of this reply is to draw attention of the readers that the major problems rose in the short Comment authored by A.M. Mukhamedzhanov, X. Tang and D.Y. Pang (arXiv:1806.05921) are totally groundless.
Comment on ``Demystifying Double Robustness: A Comparison of Alternative Strategies for Estimating a Population Mean from Incomplete Data'' [arXiv:0804.2958]
Comment on ``Demystifying Double Robustness: A Comparison of Alternative Strategies for Estimating a Population Mean from Incomplete Data'' [arXiv:0804.2958]
We comment on the Reply of G. Su and M. Suzuki [cond-mat/9808011] to our Comment [cond-mat/9807402] about the papers of G. Su [Phys. Rev. B 54, 8291 (1996)] and G. Su and M. Suzuki [Phys. Rev. B 57, 13367 (1998)]. The algebraic mistake…
We respond briefly to the recent comment by Jay Lawrence, Marcin Markiewicz and Marek \'{Z}ukowski [arXiv:2210.09025 and Found. Phys. \textbf{54}, 45 (2024)] regarding our work defending RQM against their previous assessment. We refute the…
Reinhard Werner authored a comment on my paper "What Bell Did", disputing the conclusion and argumentation of the paper. This is my reply.
We reply to the preceding Comment by E. van Beveren et al., arXiv:0811.2589 [hep-ph].
We comment on Z. D. Zhang's Response [arXiv:0812.2330] to our recent Comment [arXiv:0811.3876] addressing the conjectured solution of the three-dimensional Ising model reported in [arXiv:0705.1045].
We reply to the criticism raised by Volovik in his Comment (cond-mat/9805159) and by Hirschfeld et al. in their Comment (cond-mat/9806085).
A few final comments on arXiv:1210.7548 are given to confute incorrect arguments claimed there.
Abstract redacted by arXiv administrators.
This paper replies the comments by J. D. Jackson [Am. J. Phys. 75, 844-845 (2007)] and V. Hnizdo [Am. J. Phys. 75, 845-846 (2007)].
In this manuscript we reply to the criticisms of our paper [Eur. Phys. J. A 24, 437 (2005)] raised in a recent preprint by Achasov and Kiselev [hep-ph/0606268] and demonstrate that all their criticisms are completely irrelevant and…
In a recent publication [PRL 111, 160405 (2013)] we proved a version of Heisenberg's error-disturbance tradeoff. This result was in apparent contradiction to claims by Ozawa of having refuted these ideas of Heisenberg. In a direct reaction…
Misinterpretation in the preceding Comment of my recent analysis of the past of a photon is corrected. There is nothing in this analysis which is "contrary to the usual quantum expectations" but, nevertheless, it does provide "further…
After the rejection of their comment [arXiv:cond-mat/0609399v1] to our Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 97}, 100601 (2006), the Authors informed us that an extended version of their comment is going to be published in a different journal under the…
We respond to comments in arXiv:2502.15817v2 about our article, arXiv:2412.12282. We stand by our conclusions and defend them against the criticisms.
It is shown that the results of ref [1] are consistent.
This is a comment on the paper arXiv:1410.2840 by Ji and Jin, to appear in the AOAS.