Related papers: Reply to Comment on: ``Rashba precession in quantu…

This is a reply to the comment by A. W. Sandvik (cond-mat/0010433) on our paper Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 4204 (2000). We show that his data do not conflict with our data nor with our conclusions.

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 present numerical calculations of the ballistic spin-transport properties of quasi-one-dimensional wires in the presence of the spin-orbit (Rashba) interaction. A tight-binding analog of the Rashba Hamiltonian which models the Rashba…

We briefly remind references and arguments, already discussed in the past, which confute erroneous claims in arXiv:1210.5501.

It is shown that the Comment by Phair et al. on PRL 77, 3514 (1996) does not challenge the paper by Tõke et al. It is, in fact, consistent with all conclusions of the targeted paper. The Comment disputes claims never made.

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

We reply to the recent comment cond-mat/9810097 on our original Letter `Roughening Transition of Interfaces in Disordered Systems', Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1469 (1998).

We have reviewed the comment in [3], posted on arXiv.org concerning our recent work in [1]. We reply to the comment in this paper.

Fernandez Comment [1] on our pseudo-perturbative shifted-l expansion technique [2,3] is either unfounded or ambiguous.

A recent phase transition in the relational interpretation of quantum mechanics (RQM) is situated in its historical context, and the novelty of the post-transition viewpoint is questioned.

This is an extended Reply to Comment by A. Sergeev, M.Y. Reizer, and V. Mitin [arXiv:0906.2389] on our Letter [Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 067001 (2009)]. We explicitly demonstrate that all claims by Sergeev et al. are completely unfounded,…

We discuss the elementary errors in D.G. Zhang's [New. J. Phys. 23, 093014 (2021)] claimed exact solution of the quantum Rabi model. The erroneous solution is seen to be nothing more than the combined solution of the simpler Jaynes-Cummings…

Some misleading statements in a recent paper in PRE are corrected.

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…

A Comment on the paper "Conservative Quantum Computing" by M. Ozawa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 057902 (2002). The author replies in Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 089802 (2003).

The said paper [Su2] entitled "Proof Of Two Dimensional Jacobian Conjecture" is false.

In a recent Comment (arXiv:1510.00768) it was claimed that Braak's solution of the quantum Rabi model does not include the set of non-degenerate exceptional points and is thus not a complete solution. Braak's solution does contain these…

We show that the Comment by Reznikov and Sivan (cond-mat/0410409) is erroneous because the authors do not distinguish between Pauli and Curie spin susceptibility.

This is the reply to a Comment by Alava and Zapperi (cond-mat/0401568) on Schmittbuhl, Hansen and Batrouni, PRL, 90, 045505 (2003).

%auto-ignore Paper has been withdrawn by the author.