Related papers: Reply to Comment on "Completely positive quantum d…

Letter/comment on M. Rini, Physics $\textbf{13}$, s94 (July 27, 2020) and A. Sanna et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. $\textbf{125}$, 057001 (2020).

Gates et al (astro-ph/9606132) have raised several issues in their Comment on our Letter (Phys. Rev. Lett. Vol. 76, p.3886 (1996); astro-ph/9605001). We clarify these issues and show that our results are robust, and there is no…

We argue that our analysis of the J-Q model, presented in Phys. Rev. B 80, 174403 (2009), and based on a field-theory description of coupled dimers, captures properly the strong quantum fluctuations tendencies, and the objections outlined…

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…

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…

A Comment on the Letter by O. Viehmann, J. von Delft, and F. Marquardt [Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 107}, 113602 (2011)].

This is a comment on [G. Knight and R. Klages, Phys. Rev. E 84, 041135 (2011); also available at arXiv:1107.5293v2 [math-ph]].

In the paper "The relativistic Doppler effect: when a zero-frequency shift or a red shift exists for sources approaching the observer, Ann. Phys. (Berlin) 523, No. 3, 239-246 (2011), DOI 10.1002/andp.201000099 by C. Wang the use of an…

Reply to comment appeared on hep-lat/9912014.

The comment is intended to answer the criticism presented on `Steady-state fluctuations of a genetic feedback loop: an exact solution' [J. Chem. Phys. {\bf 137}, 035104 (2012).] and provides the missing component for the complete analytic…

Comment withdrawn.

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…

A Comment on the Letter by M. Rupp et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 058301 (2012).

I comment on the experiment to realize an "on-demand," reversible single-photon source by Kuhn, Hennrich, and Rempe [Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 067901 (2002)].

This is a comment to a letter by D. Mandal, K. Klymko and M. R. DeWeese published as Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 258001 (2017).

We argue whether physics of universal approach of Severyukhin et al. [arXiv:1703.05710] is approved.

A Comment on the Letter by E. Shchukin and W. Vogel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 230502 (2005).

We reply to a recent comment by Bhattacharya et. al. (cond-mat/9812290) on our previous Letter (PRL 81, 5640 (1998)).

This is a Comment on Phys. Rev. Lett., {\bf 95}, 187404 (2005)

We comment on a recent Letter in Phys. Rev. Lett. (M. Kafesaki, R. S. Penciu, and E. N. Economou, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 84}, 6050 (2000))