Related papers: Comments on "Recent Developments in Plasmon-Assist…

The results in the recently posted manuscript arXiv:math/0405153v3 are incorrect. The correct version of the aimed results is not original. The preprint contains material from references that are not properly quoted.

We refute in this Reply the criticisms made by M. Abdel-Aty [Phys. Rev. A 70, 047801 (2004)]. We show that none of them are founded and we demonstrate very explicitly what is wrong in the arguments developed by this author.

We reply to the comment cond-mat/0008098 by Yang, Sun, and Chang on our paper "Theory of Diluted Magnetic Semiconductor Ferromagnetism", Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 5628 (2000).

Some mathematically incorrect claims of Compagno and Persico in their reply (2002 J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 35, 8965) to my comment on their recent paper on self-dressing and radiation reaction in classical electrodynamics are pointed out.

In a recent comment [1], Masud Mansuripur presented some concerns with theoretical and experimental interpretations of She's paper [2], and concluded that She's conclusion is incorrect. We agree that, some of the She's work required further…

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].

This is the first version of the editorial foreword to the Perspective review "Research Landscape of Altermagnetism" by L. \v{S}mejkal, et al, published in Phys. Rev. X 12, 040501 (2022). Due to various editorial constraints the publish…

Brief response to a Reply [arXiv:1005.2615] on our Comments [arXiv:1005.0838] on XENON100 recent results [arXiv:1005.0380].

We provide a reply to a comment by I. Goychuk arXiv:1708.04155, version v2 from 27 Aug 2017 (not under active consideration with Phys. Rev. Lett.), on our Letter E. Aghion, D. A. Kessler and E. Barkai, Phys. Rev. Lett., 118, 260601 (2017).

It is demonstrated that remarks and criticism in work [1] (arXiv:1005.2436 nucl-th) have resulted from inattentive reading of work [2] (Phys. Rev.C 81, 035501 (2010)) or just some misunderstanding and do not influence conclusions of work…

We reply to the comment by Ying Zhang and S. Das Sarma on our PRL 94, 226405 (2005).

This is a supplementary material to our Comment arXiv:0909.4265 on M. Stern, V. Garmider, E. Segre, M. Rappaport, V. Umansky, Y. Levinson, and I. Bar-Joseph, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 257402 (2008).

We regret that PRL did not accept our Reply for publication. We believe that both our Reply and the original paper (Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 135901 (2017)) is sound and correct. We post our reply here and let readers to judge.

We respond to the recent comment [arXiv:1105.1593] on our Letter [G. G. Plunk and T. Tatsuno, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 165003 (2011)]. The comment claims that our argument for spectral transfer direction is incomplete. The comment gives an…

I show that the main statement of [Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 094802 (2010), arXiv:1005.2617] is wrong. Other inconsistences of this Letter are also discussed.

A comment to the authors' SRF Conference pre-print [1] was submitted by A. Gurevich to the arXiv [2]. In this response, we show that the arguments used in the comment are not valid. [1] arXiv:1309.3239 [2] arXiv:1309.5626

With nucl-th/0407060, Jacques Raynal uses the arXiv in a way which does not conform to standard professional practices. His posting contains many statements that are beyond the borders of acceptable scientific disputes, with the scope to…

We respond to the criticism raised in the paper arXiv:1704.07831.

Reply to the comment by D.N. Aristov and A.G. Yashenkin (cond-mat/9612245) on PRL by Balatsky and Salkola (Phys. Rev. Lett., V76, 2386, (1996), cond-mat/9602034).

A few final comments on arXiv:1210.7548 are given to confute incorrect arguments claimed there.