Related papers: Comment on "Conservative Quantum Computing"

The conclusions presented in this Letter arXiv:cond-mat/0412591 rely on not converged calculations and should be considered with caution.

In the comment, Zanardi and Rasetti argue that several claims in our recent letter (Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 1953, 1997) are questionable. The reply shows these claims remain true.

In the posting arXiv:2101.11052v2 an experimental protocol involving two spins is proposed, which should show violation of energy conservation in a quantum experiment. In the present comment an unjustified mathematical approximation leading…

Here we reply to the comment by A. F. Volkov, F. S. Bergeret, and K. B. Efetov.

We provide a reply to a comment by I. Goychuk arXiv:1708.04155, version v2 from 27 Aug 2017 (not under active consideration with Phys. Rev. Lett.), on our Letter E. Aghion, D. A. Kessler and E. Barkai, Phys. Rev. Lett., 118, 260601 (2017).

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

The author calls attention to previous work with related results, which has escaped scrutiny before the publication of the article "Nonlinear quantum evolution with maximal entropy production", Phys.Rev.A63, 022105 (2001).

This is a reply to the comment by Yuan et al. [arXiv:1009.6130v1] on our publication [arXiv:1008.4593].

This is a 1-page comment on a wrong paper that recently appeared in PRL (Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (23), 5393 (2001), also quant-ph/0101004). The authors claim to have shown that using a quantum computer gives an "exponential advantage" for…

This is a comment on [Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 243004 (2003)] by Marlan O. Scully, Vitaly V. Kocharovsky, Alexey Belyanin, Edward Fry and Federico Capasso (quant-ph/0305178).

This is a position paper written as an introduction to the special volume on quantum algorithms I edited for the journal Mathematical Structures in Computer Science (Volume 20 - Special Issue 06 (Quantum Algorithms), 2010).

Recently, the paper B. Georgeot and D.L. Shepelyansky, Phys. Rev. Lett._86_, 5393 (2001) has been criticized [C. Zalka, quant-ph/0110019; L. Di'osi, quant-ph/0110026]. The Letter claims an exponential speedup and reduction in error…

This is a reply to the paper by S.C.Benjamin, quant-ph/0008127.

This paper is Comment on the paper: S.A.R. Horsley and M. Babiker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 010405 (2005).

This paper replies to the comment by Jefimenko: "Causal equations for electric and magnetic fields and Maxwell's equations: Comment on a paper by Heras" [Am. J. Phys. 76, 101-101 (2008)]."

We make some comments about the results we obtained in Phys. Rev. Lett. 86,3392(2001), and in Phys. Rev. Lett.87, 177206 (2001), and show that the conclusion of a recent paper [cond-mat/0409495] leveling some criticism on our results is, in…

Reply to comment by Jain, Cond-mat 9409012 published in the Physical Review Letters, Number 73, 1052 (1994).

This is a comment on "Universal Fluctuations in Correlated Systems", by Bramwell et al, Phys. Rev. Lett., 84, 3744 (2000.

The paper comments on "Quantifying long-term scientific impact". It indicates that there is a mistake of [D. S. Wang , C. Song, A. L. Barabasi, Quantifying long-term scientific impact, Science 342, 127 (2013), arXiv:1306.3293].

We provide our reply to the comment by Greiter and Schuricht (cond-mat/0511607).