Related papers: Reply to the Comment by S.E. Sebastian and N. Harr…

No abstract available.

We respond to Comment on our recent letter (Phys.Rev.Lett.99:092501,2007) by Dean et al (arXiv:0709.0449).

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.

We construct dense holomorphic curves that do not lift to any ramified cover.

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

This is the reply to the comment arXiv:0801.4620 by Vidal, Dusuel, and Schmidt.

This is a comment on two recent arXiv postings.

Paper is withdrawn

A reply to the comment by Lee et al. [arXiv:1309.5367]

It is shown that the Comment by Phair et al. on PRL 77, 3514 (1996) does not challenge the paper by Tõke et al. It is, in fact, consistent with all conclusions of the targeted paper. The Comment disputes claims never made.

We reply a Comment (hep-th/xxx) on our recent paper published in Phys Rev Lett 72 (1994) 2527-2530. We point out that the author of the Comment overlooks the highly non-trivial Chern-Simons interactions and his hand-waving arguments are…

Reply to Ikeda (arXiv:0712.3341).

This is a reply to the paper by S.C.Benjamin, quant-ph/0008127.

It is argued that a recent claim that there is no radiation in the preacceleration part of a non-runaway solution of the Abraham--Lorentz equation is incorrect.

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

Comment on "Citation Statistics" [arXiv:0910.3529]

Comment on "Citation Statistics" [arXiv:0910.3529]

Here we give our reply to the comment by Sibirtsev et al on our paper ``Mass and K-Lambda Coupling of the N*(1535)".

There is neither motivation nor need to introduce 'superstatistics.'

Remarks on reply (cond-mat/0206368) to Johansen's comment (cond-mat/0205249)