Related papers: Agterberg, Zheng, and Mukherjee Reply

A Comment on the Letter by C. F. Qiao and L. Tang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 221601 (2014) [arXiv:1408.3995]

We discuss various relations between part of the results in arXiv:2103.05803v4 and recent author's results.

In their reply arXiv:1408.2230, the authors corrected some inappropriate sentences and clarified misleading descriptions in their original manuscript arXiv:1407.5194v1.

Comment on the Letter by M. Franz and Z. Tesanovic, Phys. Rev. Lett. v.87, p.257003 (2001).

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

Reply to the comment, cond-mat/0209398 by by N.W. Watkins, S.C. Chapman, and G. Rowlands

The Response [J. Chem. Phys. 160, 187102 (2024)] of Inoue and coworkers to my Comment [J. Chem. Phys. 160, 187101 (2024)] on their original paper [J. Chem. Phys. 159, 054105 (2023)] clarifies some points put forward in my Comment, but also…

This is a Comment on the Article ``Aging, phase ordering and conformal invariance'' by M.Henkel, M.Pleimling, C.Godr\`eche and J.M.Luck [Phys.Rev.Lett. 87, 265701 (2001)].

We respond to a Comment on our recent paper (Phys.Rev.C77:024304,2008) by Paar (arXiv:0803.0274).

This reply contains a brief response to the comment by R. Howl, D. R\"atzel, and I. Fuentes [arXiv:1811.10306]

We have reviewed the comment in [3], posted on arXiv.org concerning our recent work in [1]. We reply to the comment in this paper.

This is a brief response to a recent posting by Gross.

This is a reply to the comment by J. L. Alonso et al. (arXiv:1302.6146; to appear in J. Chem. Phys) on our paper A. Abedi, N. T. Maitra, and E. K. U. Gross, J. Chem. Phys. 137, 22A530 (2012) [arXiv: 1208.4388]

A Comment on the Letter by E. Shchukin and W. Vogel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 230502 (2005).

A comment on the preprint "Towards a quantitative kinetic theory of polar active matter" by T. Ihle, arXiv:1401.8056.

In the recently posted arXiv:2312.04495v3 [1], its authors used a computer code written by me supplied to them by the authors of Ref. [2], and claimed that the results that they obtained invalidate the results and conclusions presented in…

It is shown that the results of ref [1] are consistent.

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.

A comment to the paper by S. Chen, H. B\"uttner, and J. Voit, [Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 87}, 087205 (2001)].

Comment on cond-mat/0205390; PRL 90, 026805 (2003)