Related papers: Chen and Itoi Reply
This reply contains a brief response to the comment by R. Howl, D. R\"atzel, and I. Fuentes [arXiv:1811.10306]
The calculations of Guang-Wen Ma's recent Letter [Phys.Lett. A239, (1998) 209] contain an easily detectable error which makes his conclusions irrelevant.
We make a few comments on some misleading statements in the above paper.
The paper was withdrawn by the authors.
A reply to the comment by V. R. Shaginyan et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 279701 (2011), arXiv:1206.5372] on our article [Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 137002 (2011), arXiv:1012.0303].
We respond to `Comments on the U(2) ADHM two-instanton' [Y. Tian, Phys. Lett. B 566 (2003) 183].
The possibilities of unlike particle correlations for a study of particle delays and spatial shifts in relativistic heavy ion collisions are demonstrated. This report represents the unpublished Ref. [4] in the paper by S. Voloshin et al.,…
We reply to comment on recent paper by Pieplow and Henkel (New J. Phys. 15 (2013) 023027) and our results made by Volokitin and Persson (arXiv: 1405.2525)
The commented manuscript was submitted for publication without informing at least four of the other authors, viz. N. Severijns, O. Zimmer, H.-F. Wirth and D. Rich. This violates our rights as collaborators. The analysis presented and the…
A comment on the paper Appl. Phys. Lett. 104, 161116 (2014).
This comment about the article "Hamiltonian for the Zeros of the Riemann Zeta Function", by C. M. Bender, D. C. Brody, and M. P. M\"uller, published recently in Phys. Rev. Lett. (Phys. Rev. Lett., 118, 130201, (2017)) gives arguments…
The criticism of the experiment showing disconnected traces of photons passing through a nested Mach-Zehnder interferometer is shown to be unfounded.
The Response [J. Chem. Phys. 160, 187102 (2024)] of Inoue and coworkers to my Comment [J. Chem. Phys. 160, 187101 (2024)] on their original paper [J. Chem. Phys. 159, 054105 (2023)] clarifies some points put forward in my Comment, but also…
We reply to a recent comment by Bhattacharya et. al. (cond-mat/9812290) on our previous Letter (PRL 81, 5640 (1998)).
In this manuscript we reply to the criticisms of our paper [Eur. Phys. J. A 24, 437 (2005)] raised in a recent preprint by Achasov and Kiselev [hep-ph/0606268] and demonstrate that all their criticisms are completely irrelevant and…
We refute the criticism expressed in a Comment by P. J. Mart\'{\i}nez and R. Chac\'on [arXiv:2105.09308] on our paper Phys. Rev. E \textbf{97}, 032219 (2018). We first show that our paper is free of any mistakes and that the criticism…
It is shown that a recently proposed relativistic field theory of anyons is mathematically flawed and also does not satisfy reasonable criteria for such a theory.
It is shown that the recent Comment [cond-mat/0306019] by Y. Yu on the above article is not substantiated.
We make remarks on Ristroph and Zhang's [{\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 101}, 194502 (2008)] paper. We argue especially that due to the interferences the calibration procedures in [1] were not complete and this will induce some measurements'…
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.