Related papers: Comment on "Force-field functor theory" [arXiv:130…
This paper replies the comment by E. Kapuscik [Am. J. Phys. 77, 754 (2009)]
This is a comment on Phys. Rev. A 67, 022104(2003).
I comment on a recent preprint "A Proposal to Measure Photon-Photon Scattering" that appeared recently as arXiv:1106.0465v1 [hep-ph].
We reply to the comment arXiv:quant-ph/0702060 on our letter arXiv:quant-ph/0603120 [Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 100402 (2006)]
This is a comment on J. Schmittbuhl, A. Hansen, and G. G. Batrouni, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 045505 (2003). They offer a reply, in turn.
Draft version of an article prepared for the Encyclopedia of Mathematical Physics, Elsevier, to appear in 2006.
We reply to comment on recent paper by Pieplow and Henkel (New J. Phys. 15 (2013) 023027) and our results made by Volokitin and Persson (arXiv: 1405.2525)
I comment on a recent preprint "Neutrino Velocity Anomalies: A Resolution without a Revolution" that appeared recently as arXiv:1110.0989 [hep-ph]
Some remarks are made on the theoretical interpretation of recent experimental results on the propagation speed of electromagnetic force fields.
This is a comment on the preprint arXiv:1809.07771v2 by W. Ji and X.-G. Wen.
We comment on recent e-print by L. Mardoyan et al. [cond-mat/0609768]
A comment on the preprint "Towards a quantitative kinetic theory of polar active matter" by T. Ihle, arXiv:1401.8056.
Comment on ``Lancaster Probabilities and Gibbs Sampling'' [arXiv:0808.3852]
Comment on "New Mean-Field Theory of the tt't"J Model Applied to the High-Tc Superconductors" by T. C. Ribeiro and X.-G. Wen [cond-mat/0410750; Physical Review Letters 95, 057001 (2005)].
This paper replies to the comment by Jefimenko: "Causal equations for electric and magnetic fields and Maxwell's equations: Comment on a paper by Heras" [Am. J. Phys. 76, 101-101 (2008)]."
Certain comments on the paper of Yu.V. Orlov, B. F. Irgaziev and L. I. Nikitina published in Phys.At.Nuclei, {\bf 73} (2010) 757 are made.
Here we reply to the comment of Li et al. (arXiv:2009.09377) on the preprint (arXiv:2003.00760) of our publication (Z. Naturforsch. A 75, 803-807; DOI:10.1515/zna-2020-0204).
Reply to the recent comment by I.Ispolatov and M.Karttunen, cond-mat/0303564
Comments on the article "Pulsar dynamics: magnetic dipole model revisited".
Results of the experiments carried out in [Shahriar S. Afshar, Proc. SPIE bf 5866 (2005) 229-244] and [Shahriar S. Afshar, AIP Cof. Proc. 810, (2006) 294-299] are reviewed and their interpretation by the authors is questioned. Arguments are…