Related papers: Comment on "The double-Kerr solution" by W.B. Bonn…

Comment on the Letter ``Polynomial-Time Simulation of Pairing Models on a Quantum Computer'', L. A. Wu, M. S. Byrd and D. A. Lidar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 057904 (2002).

Comment on paper by A. Zvyagin, Phys. Rev. B 64, R060405 (2001).

A recent paper of Trandafir and Cabello [Phys. Rev. A, 111, 022408 (2025)] contains a number of errors, inconsistencies, and inefficiencies. They are too numerous to be listed here, so we identify and discuss them in the main body of the…

In their reply arXiv:1408.2230, the authors corrected some inappropriate sentences and clarified misleading descriptions in their original manuscript arXiv:1407.5194v1.

Inconsistencies are pointed out in a recent proposal [L. Diosi, Phys. Rev. A 80, 064104 (2009); arXiv:0905.3908v1] for a quantum version of the classical linear Boltzmann equation.

We point out that an erroneous derivation in the recent paper [Fetecau et al., Nonlinear Anal. RWA 12 (2011) 1] yields a correct solution by accident. Additionally, a number of misrepresentations and inaccuracies in the latter recent paper…

A recent Comment by W. T. Kranz is shown to be plagued by a serious mathematical error which makes its conclusions invalid.

We demonstrate the existence of equilibrium states in the limiting cases of the double-Kerr solution when one of the constituents is an extreme object. In the `extreme-subextreme' case the negative mass of one of the constituents is…

I reply to a Comment by Q. Wang and W.G. Unruh regarding my paper "Hiding the Cosmological Constant" [Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 131302].

We reply to Dukelsky, et al. regarding the article: L. A. Wu, M. S. Byrd and D. A. Lidar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 057904 (2002).

We respond to `Comments on the U(2) ADHM two-instanton' [Y. Tian, Phys. Lett. B 566 (2003) 183].

A recent Comment [arXiv:0811.2790] on the Letter 'Quantum Bounce and Cosmic Recall' by the authors is shown to arise from an incorrect understanding of the issues at hand and of our analysis. The conclusions of Bojowald's Comment are shown…

We reply to the comments on our previous paper Physical Review A, Vol. 101, 023843 (2020), raised by H. Schuermann and V. Serov in arXiv:2204.05846.

A comment on a recent Letter by Baker and Kawashima (Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 75}, 994 (1995)).

Claims by Kroha and Zawadowski in cond-mat/0105026 on inadequate approximations and an incorrect statement in cond-mat/0102150 are shown to be based on oversimplified estimates and a false quotation.

Comment on "High Resolution Polar Effect Measurements of Sr2RuO4: Evidence for Broken Time-Reversal Symmetry in the Superconducting State" by J. Xia et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 167002 (2006).

A comment on the paper "Truncated Schwinger-Dyson Equations and Gauge Covariance in QED3", Few-Body Syst. 41, 185 (2007) [hep-ph/0511291].

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).

We describe several omissions and deficiencies in the arguments presented by Ackermann et al. (arXiv:2401.07684), pointing at missing information necessary to back up its conclusions.

Based on easy-to-follow considerations it is not difficult to be vehemently opposed not only the solutions found in that paper but also the conclusions manifested there.