Related papers: Reply to "Comment on Strangeness -2 hypertriton"
This paper has been withdrawn by the authors due to an unlikely results.
This submission is withdrawn by arXiv administrators. arXiv does not accept book advertisements.
In the paper, the author derives several "diagonal" recurrence relations, constructs some inequalities, finds monotonicity, and poses a conjecture related to Stirling numbers of the second kind.
A modified version of this paper is under process and with a new title and abstract. Hence, this version of the article is completely withdrawn.
The paper has been withdrawn, since there is a mistake in Proposition 5.2. The result on the telescope conjecture for semihereditary rings is correct, but the characterization of the smashing subcategories of the derived category of…
We revisit Bogdan Nica's 2011 paper, The Unreasonable Slightness of E2 over Imaginary Quadratic Rings, and correct an inaccuracy in his proof.
In this note we answer the two questions raised by Y.Y Li and L. Nguyen in their note [LN2] below.
In a recent paper (arXiv:2110.06213v1) it was argued that in 4D supergravity a previously unknown candidate anomaly exists. In the present paper it is pointed out that the existence of such a candidate would contradict results available in…
Hervik's comments on my criticism of the paper of Jaffe et al are irrelevant or wrong.
This letter is a comment on an article by T.C. Halsey and M.H. Jensen in Nature about using recurrence times as a reliable tool to estimate multifractal dimensions of strange attractors. Our aim is to emphasize that in the recent…
A Comment on the recently published reevaluation of the polarization-averaged parton distribution of strange quarks in the nucleon using final data on the multiplicities of charged kaons in semi-inclusive deep-inelastic scattering is…
This paper has been withdrawn by the authors due to a coding error and a missed diagram. The calculation has been completely redone, with very different results, and with an additional author, and will be submitted to the arxiv shortly.
A Comment by R. Blumenfeld on our recent analytical solution for the random close packing density [A. Zaccone, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 028002 (2022)] is shown to be plagued by important errors and to contain incorrect statements.
We review the derivations and conclusions made in Caravelli and Modesto (2010 \textit{Class. Quantum Grav.} \textbf{27} 245022, arXiv:1006.0232) and show that most of the analysis performed there is not valid.
Further experiments showed the incorrectness of proposed interpretation.
Upon presenting the proof of Theorem 3.3 in "Maximal chains in $$ and ultrapowers of the integers" I discovered that it is not entirely correct and certainly some details should be added. I have therefore written an addendum to the paper…
We respond to invalid criticism in the recent Comment by Schneider et al. [arXiv:1407.4127v1]
This article is a reply to the Comment by D. Spemann et al (arXiv:1204.2992) in response to our paper 'Revealing common artifacts due to ferromagnetic inclusions in highly oriented pyrolytic graphite' (EPL, 97 (2012) 47001).
We reply to the Comment by Hartmann (cond-mat/9908132) on our paper Phys. Rev. Lett. 84 (2000) 2026 (also cond-mat/9907125).
In hep-ph/0404212 Diakonov, Petrov, and Polyakov respond to my recent comments on their 1997 paper, ``Exotic anti-decuplet of baryons: prediction from chiral solitons''. Their responses do not address the basic issues or alter the…