Related papers: Reply to "Comment on Testing Planck-Scale Gravity …
This resource letter provides an introduction to some of the main current topics in experimental tests of general relativity as well as to some of the historical literature. It is intended to serve as a guide to the field for upper-division…
Discussion on paper "Experimental study of radiative shocks at PALS facility" by C. Stehle et al (arXiv:1003.2739v1 [astro-ph.SR]) is presented, findings are questioned.
In a recent letter, Gaidarzhy et al. claim to have observed evidence for quantized displacements of a nanomechanical oscillator. We contend that the evidence, analysis, claims, and conclusions presented are contrary to expectations from…
Quantum-gravity effects are expected to be suppressed by the Planck mass. For experimental progress it is therefore important to identify potential signatures from Planck-scale physics that are amenable to ultrahigh-precision tests. It is…
This correspondence answers the criticisms raised in McGaugh et al 2018 and Kroupa et al 2018.
A Comment on the Letter by C. R. Galley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 174301 (2013).
We review the foundations of Einstein's general theory of relativity, discuss recent progress in the tests of relativistic gravity, and present motivations for new generation of high-accuracy gravitational experiments. We discuss the…
A design is presented of a laboratory experiment that could test the suitability of relativistic gravity for propulsion of spacecraft to relativistic speeds. An exact time-dependent solution of Einstein's gravitational field equation…
The conditions of tests and calibrations described in the article E.E Kading et al. [Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023279 (2020)] show striking flaws. The interpretation and extraction of quantitative results from this experiment are considered…
F. Rohrlich has recently published two papers, including the paper under review, advocating a particular delay-differential equation as an approximate equation of motion for classical charged particles, which he characterizes as providing a…
This is an addendum to the Reply Comment [Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 139602 (2009), arXiv:0811.0518] to Comment [Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 139601 (2009), arXiv:0810.4791] on Letter [Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 116101 (2008), arXiv:0804.1898].
We respond to N. Szpak's comment [arXiv:0907.5146v2] on our paper "Late-time tails of a self-gravitating massless scalar field, revisited", Class. Quantum Grav. 26, 175006 (2009). [arXiv:0812.4333]
We respond to comments in arXiv:2502.15817v2 about our article, arXiv:2412.12282. We stand by our conclusions and defend them against the criticisms.
Recent papers by Samuel declared that the linearized post-Newtonian v/c effects are too small to have been measured in the recent experiment involving Jupiter and quasar J0842+1845 that was used to measure the ultimate speed of gravity…
We reply to a comment by Averin and Korotkov http://uk.arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0404549 on Stace and Barrett, PRL 92, 136802 (2004) http://link.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v92/e136802, showing that their specific criticisms are unfounded, and…
This reply to Dr. Smolyakov's comment [2] on our PRL paper [1] was solicited by PRL on Nov. 17, 2021 and submitted to PRL on Nov. 30, 2021. Regretfully, the editors of PRL decided not to publish Dr. Smolyakov's comment; hence, not our reply…
Over the last few years the study of possible Planck-scale departures from classical Lorentz symmetry has been one of the most active areas of quantum-gravity research. We now have a satisfactory description of the fate of Lorentz symmetry…
Calin Galeriu(CG) has commented [1] about our manuscript, "Doppler signature in electrodynamic retarded potentials" [2], that must be properly addressed, amending at the same time of notation errors [3] to clarify some formal aspects which…
Shukla and Akbari-Moghanjoughi have {\it corrected} their Comment (see their version 1 on `arXiv:1207.7029v1) to EPL on our work [1] after receiving our Response from the Editors of EPL. We have a pleasant duty at hand to present our second…
We reply to a Comment [Berengut and Flambaum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 068901 (2012), arXiv:1203.5592] on our recent Letter [Kentosh and Mohageg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 110801 (2012), arXiv:1203.0102]. The Comment objects to our work partly…