Related papers: Reply to a comment on "A Comparison Between Broad …

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.

The comments of Guseinov on our recent paper (Czech. J. Phys., 52 (2002)1297) have been analyzed critically. It is shown that his comments are irrelevant and also unjust. In contrast to his comment, it is proved that the presented formulae…

In this Comment, we refute conclusions made in Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 233601 (2014) by L.-G. Wang, L. Wang, M. Al-Amri, S.-Y. Zhu, and M. S. Zubairy. These conclusions stem from the use of the linear theory, which is not applicable to…

A recent paper by Bluemer et al. [cond-mat/0609758] again criticizes earlier QMC/DMFT results by Liebsch [Phys. Rev. B {\bf 70}, 165103 (2004)]. This criticism is shown to be unfounded.

We show that the comment [cond-mat/0408217] by Continentino on our recent paper [PRL 91, 066404 (2003), cond-mat/0212335] reaches incorrect conclusions as the comment wrongly extrapolates from results valid close to a classical phase…

A comment to the paper by S. Chen, H. B\"uttner, and J. Voit, [Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 87}, 087205 (2001)].

The reply by Oughstun et al. [J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 28, 468-469 (2011)] to our comment [J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 28, 450-452 (2011)] on their recently published paper [J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 27, 1664-1670 (2010)] is shown to make no response to the main…

It is shown that criticism of my paper arXiv:0801.0656 Phys. Rev. Lett, vol. 101, 163202 (2008) by the authors of Comment arXiv:0810.3243v1 is wrong and that their main arguments are in contradiction with established concepts of statistical…

We reply to the comment (cond-mat/9806125) by Essler, Goehmann and Korepin, and show that their points are unfounded.

A comment on cond-mat/0210707, cond-mat/0208230, cond-mat/0207153, and cond-mat/0202140.

This is a short communication in reference to the comments in (arXiv: 1605.05147) of our paper in Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 25, 1650051 (2016). We have tried to answer to the comments or criticism in the paper.

We provide our reply to the comment by Greiter and Schuricht (cond-mat/0511607).

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).

After the rejection of their comment [arXiv:cond-mat/0609399v1] to our Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 97}, 100601 (2006), the Authors informed us that an extended version of their comment is going to be published in a different journal under the…

We provide a reply to a comment by I. Goychuk arXiv:1501.06996 [cond-mat.stat-mech] (not under active consideration with Phys. Rev. Lett.) on our Letter A. Rebenshtok, S. Denisov, P. H\"anggi, and E. Barkai, {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf…

This paper replies the comments by J. D. Jackson [Am. J. Phys. 75, 844-845 (2007)] and V. Hnizdo [Am. J. Phys. 75, 845-846 (2007)].

This is a reply to the comment from E. Amselem et al. on our paper (Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 150401 (2012), arXiv:1207.0059).

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…

Reply to the Comment physics/0307134 by A. Helmstetter and D. Sornette

Recently K. Banaszek, I. A. Walmsley, K. Wodkiewicz (quant-ph/0012097) commented on our Proposal for the Measurement of Bell-Type Correlations from Continuous Variables [T. C. Ralph, W. J. Munro, R. E. S. Polkinghorne, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85,…