Related papers: A Corrigendum to Unreasonable Slightness

Two typos in the published paper are pointed out. Both are just typos and the calculations in that paper are based on the correct formulism.

We point out that a concise proof of Theorem 2 in the article, 'On a quadratic estimate of Shafer' by L. Zhu contains a small mistake. Correcting this mistake and giving alternative proofs of Theorem 2 is the main aim of this note.

Boris Shoikhet noticed that the proof of lemma 1 in section 2.3 of math.QA/0504420 contains an error. In this note I give a correct proof of this lemma which was suggested to me by Dmitry Tamarkin. The correction does not change the results…

The method recently proposed by Skala and Cizek for calculating perturbation energies in a strict sense is ambiguous because it is expressed as a ratio of two quantities which are separately divergent. Even though this ratio comes out…

Claims by Kroha and Zawadowski in cond-mat/0105026 on inadequate approximations and an incorrect statement in cond-mat/0102150 are shown to be based on oversimplified estimates and a false quotation.

In this paper we analyze the status of some `unbelievable results' presented in the paper `On Some Contradictory Computations in Multi-Dimensional Mathematics' [1] published in Nonlinear Analysis, a journal indexed in the Science Citation…

In this note, the correction to the proof of one theorem in some our previous paper [arXiv:1302.0589] will be given.

Correction to The Annals of Probability 21 (1993) 554--580 [http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.aop/1176989415]

An error in the paper [J. Math. Phys. 43, 6343 (2002); math-ph/0207009] is corrected. Further explanation is given.

We show that the Novikov-Shubin invariant of an element of the integral group ring of the lamplighter group Z_2 \wr Z can be irrational. This disproves a conjecture of Lott and Lueck. Furthermore we show that every positive real number is…

We show that the criticism of our paper [Phys. Rev. B 65, 125109 (2002)] by Wang, Millis, and Das Sarma [cond-mat/0206203] is based on a trivial mathematical mistake they have committed.

This is the Reply to the Comment by E. Thuneberg refuting the paper by E. B.Sonin [Phys. Rev. B 104, 094517 (2021)] as incorrect. The criticism is based on a misunderstanding of the goal and the approach of the paper and does not provide…

To account for the first proof of existence of an irrational magnitude, historians of science as well as commentators of Aristotle refer to the texts on the incommensurability of the diagonal in Prior Analytics, since they are the most…

We rebut Kowalenko's claims in 2010 that he proved the irrationality of Euler's constant, and that his rational series for it is new.

We correct the proof of Theorem 4.1 from [C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Soc. R. Can. \textbf{44} (2022), no. 4, 88--112].

A comment on the Letter by S. Braun, F. A. Asenjo and S. M. Mahajan, Phys. Rev. Lett., 109, 175003 (2012). We show that recent arguments for light amplification driven by inhomogeneous quantum spin fields in low temperature electron plasmas…

In the erratum we correct a mistake (due to a wrong choice of basic polynomial invariants over Z[1/2]) in the original paper (v1). Using the correct basic polynomial invariants we improve our results and bounds on the annihilator. We also…

This short "education note" was inspired by Zvi Artstein's masterpiece Mathematics and the Real World, the Remarkable Role of Evolution in the Making of Mathematics (p. 53, and p. 400)

We make two tiny corrections to our previous paper with the same title, and also obtain, as a bonus, something new.

There is an error in the proof (but not the truth) of Theorem 3.2 in the author's 1985 paper "The Double-Wedge Algebra for Quantum Fields on Schwarzschild and Minkowski Spacetimes" in "Communications in Mathematical Physics". The author…