Related papers: Remarks on reply to Johansen's comment
We are pleased to see that Jeckelmann has made many changes to the original version of his comment on our paper as a result of our response. Here is a copy of this powerful response that reveals problems in his previous results. However,…
Reply to Comment on 'Length Scale Dependence of DNA Mechanical Properties'
The authors of the Comment ascribe us claims never made while moderating their own previous unsubstantiated statements.
We make several comments on "Note on the Analytical Solution of the Rabi Model" (arXiv:1210.4946).
The main results of papers gr-qc/0307026 and gr-qc/0312068 are formulated. These results are opposite to conclusions of paper astro-ph/0305039 and comments gr-qc/0309036.
Here we give our reply to the comment by Sibirtsev et al on our paper ``Mass and K-Lambda Coupling of the N*(1535)".
Rejoinder to "Citation Statistics" [arXiv:0910.3529]
A recent e-print (cond-mat/0604532) presented a proposed Comment to Applied Physics Letters on our publication Appl. Phys. Lett. 88, 162503 (2006), cond-mat/0603260. Here is our Response. As the proposed Comment has now been rejected by…
To appear in Phys. Rev. Lett. together with the author's Reply.
This is a reply to Johansen's comment on `Are Financial Crashes Predictable?', by L. Laloux, M. Potters, R. Cont, J.P. Aguilar, J.P. Bouchaud, Europhys. Lett. 45, p. 1 (1999).
Comment on ``Lancaster Probabilities and Gibbs Sampling'' [arXiv:0808.3852]
Reply to the comment, cond-mat/0209398 by by N.W. Watkins, S.C. Chapman, and G. Rowlands
This is an appendix to our paper "An update of the Hirsch Conjecture" (arXiv:0907.1186), containing proofs of some of the results and comments that were omitted in it.
Comment on "Harold Jeffreys's Theory of Probability Revisited" [arXiv:0804.3173]
Comment on "Harold Jeffreys's Theory of Probability Revisited" [arXiv:0804.3173]
Comment on "Harold Jeffreys's Theory of Probability Revisited" [arXiv:0804.3173]
Comment on "Harold Jeffreys's Theory of Probability Revisited" [arXiv:0804.3173]
In the present work we reply to the Comment by Catalan and Scott (cond-mat/0607500) on two of our papers. This Comment has been rejected from publication in Physical Review Letters and, hence, our Reply is based on the cond-mat version.
A reply to arXiv:0809.2310, "Comment on Universal Charge-Radius Relation for Subatomic and Astrophysical Compact Objects" [arXiv:0804.2140,PRL100(2008)151102]
The article provides a counterexample to a conjecture by Blocki-Zwonek.