Related papers: Reply to the Comment by S.E. Sebastian and N. Harr…
%auto-ignore Paper has been withdrawn by the author.
We comment on a Letter by Vilar and Rubi [arXiv:0704.0761].
Benenti et al. recently submitted a Comment (arXiv:0912.3667) on our work "Coherent Ratchets in Driven Bose-Einstein condensates". We show that the main claim of the Comment is wrong, and correct some other misunderstandings presented…
In his fresh "Comment" (arXiv:0711.0137v1), A. Mostafazadeh reacts on my very recent letter (arXiv:0710.5653v1) where I tried to clarify certain misunderstandings which occurred in A. M., Phys. Lett. B \textbf{650}, 208 (2007)…
We show that very clear answers to the queries raised by D. Chen and R. Ni in their Comment on our recent paper [A. Zaccone, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 028002 (2022)] can be found in our original paper already. The paper [A. Zaccone, Phys. Rev.…
The Comment of Openov (PRL 93, 158901 (2004)) on my Physical Review Letter (PRL 92, 120405 (2004)) does not affect the universality of the decoherence mechanism described in the Letter.
A short Reply to the Comment of Prokof'ev and Svistunov, cond-mat/0504008, is given.
Introducing the discussion paper by Sz\'{e}kely and Rizzo
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…
The Comment by Duval et al. [PRL 96, 099701 (2006)] addresses an important, but not the main, result of our Letter [PRL 95, 137204 (2005)]. It does not contradict our results in substance, and the only objection is really on the style of…
It is shown that the experiments of A.M. Toader, J. P. Goff, M. Roger, N. Shannon, J. R. Stewart, and M. Enderle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 197202 (2005) do not provide definitive experimental evidence for ring exchange terms in the Hamiltonian…
An abstract formulation of Harder-Narasimhan theory is stated without proof by L. Fargues, and I found it helpful to write it all out.
This is a response to the commentaries on "CoRR: A Computing Research Repository".
A recent e-print (cond-mat/0604532) presented a proposed Comment to Applied Physics Letters on our publication Appl. Phys. Lett. 88, 162503 (2006), cond-mat/0603260. Here is our Response. As the proposed Comment has now been rejected by…
Here I explain why critics of my work [arXiv:1104.5314] in the above paper [arXiv:1306.5210] is inadequate.
The Reply to G. W. Bruhn is added.
In this paper dedicated to the memory of Walter Philipp, we formalize the rules of classical$\to$ quantum correspondence and perform a rigorous mathematical analysis of the assumptions in Bell's NO-GO arguments.
Eisenstein and Bunn have widely circulated a Comment (astro-ph/9704247) suggesting a non-standard null hypothesis in a test for cosmological birefringence. The Comment misrepresents the procedure used by Nodland and Ralston (B. Nodland and…
The work of Yuan et al. (Phys. Rev. C 60 (1999) 045203) is being represented as definitive regarding the non-existence of a particular nonstrange, isoscalar, spin three dibaryon which has been proposed. We comment on this paper and its…
We make corrections on the paper by Frampton and Takahashi [{\it Astropart. Phys.} {\bf 22} (2004) 307]. Our focus is especially upon Eqs. (12-15) therein.