Related papers: Comment on "Conservative Quantum Computing"

It is demonstrated that remarks and criticism in work [1] (arXiv:1005.2436 nucl-th) have resulted from inattentive reading of work [2] (Phys. Rev.C 81, 035501 (2010)) or just some misunderstanding and do not influence conclusions of work…

This is a Comment on Phys Rev Lett 75 (1995) 1239, by Goldenberg and Vaidman

This is a comment to J. Konig, Y. Gefen and G. Schon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 4468 (1998) who consider the coupling of two discrete levels of a dot to the continuum of states in reservoirs. We have generalized this work to the case of several…

This is our formal Reply to revised version (v2) of arXiv: nucl-th/0510004v2.

We comment on the paper hep-ph/9701265.

It is shown that the results of ref [1] are consistent.

We extend the notion of conservativeness, given by Fredkin and Toffoli in 1982, to generic gates whose input and output lines may assume a finite number d of truth values. A physical interpretation of conservativeness in terms of…

This is a reply to the Comment by S.-Y. Wang concerning our paper "Modified Coulomb Law in a Strongly Magnetized Vacuum"

I reply to the comment by Dr S. Nishigaki (hep-th/0007042) to my papers Phys. Rev. D61 (2000) 056005 and Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 016005.

A review of progress in NMR quantum computing and a brief survey of the literature

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

Some formulas and speculations are presented relative to integrable systems and quantum mechanics.

We comment on Z. D. Zhang's Response [arXiv:0812.2330] to our recent Comment [arXiv:0811.3876] addressing the conjectured solution of the three-dimensional Ising model reported in [arXiv:0705.1045].

We respond to comments in arXiv:2502.15817v2 about our article, arXiv:2412.12282. We stand by our conclusions and defend them against the criticisms.

This is a reply to the Comment on 'Spin Decoherence in Superconducting Atom Chips' [arXiv:quant-ph/0610095 (2006)].

We reply to P. Forg\'acs, T. Herpay, and P. Kov\'acs (arXiv: 1202.6289).

This is a reply to the comment from E. Amselem et al. on our paper (Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 150401 (2012), arXiv:1207.0059).

We reply to Comment by J. Gemmer, L. Knipschild, R. Steinigeweg (arXiv:1712.02128) on our paper Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 100601 (2017).

We comment on S. Carlip's recent Letter "Hiding the Cosmological Constant" [Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 131302].

In quant-ph/9812017v2 M.B. Mensky reviewed our application of the restricted path integral approach to quantum measurements of energy. In this comment we point out that Mensky's assessment of our results is incorrect.