Related papers: Reply to ``Comment on ``Lateral Casimir Force beyo…

Here we reply to the comment of Li et al. (arXiv:2009.09377) on the preprint (arXiv:2003.00760) of our publication (Z. Naturforsch. A 75, 803-807; DOI:10.1515/zna-2020-0204).

We demonstrate that the approach by Rodrigues et al. (PRL, v.96, 100402, 2006) to the description of the lateral Casimir force between corrugated surfaces is in disagreement with a path-integral theory by Emig et al. (PRA, v.67, 022114,…

We comment on a recently published measurement of the Casimir force for distances in the 0.6 to 6 micrometer range between two Au surfaces (Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 5(1997)) and the net discrepancy reported for the comparison with theoretical…

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…

We respond below to the comment of E. I. Lashin [ arXiv:1505.03070 ] on our work Phys. Lett. {\bf B741} (2015) 276-279 [ arXiv:1404.3093 ], and point out the errors in that comment.

This is a comment on Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 180403 (2007) [arXiv:0704.2162].

The aim of this communication is to correct inaccurate statements presented in a Commentary on the paper titled: "Radiation forces and torque on a rigid elliptical cylinder in acoustical plane progressive and (quasi)standing waves with…

We call attention to a series of mistakes in a paper by S. Nam [JHEP 10 (2000) 044, hep-th/0008083].

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

Reply to the preceding comment by Rolf Schilling and Bernhard Schmid [arXiv:1101.5577, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 049601 (2011)].

We reply to the "Comment on 'The Lifshitz-Matsubara sum formula for the Casimir pressure between magnetic metallic mirrors'" [arXiv:1604.06432]. We believe the comment misrepresents our papers, and fails to provide a plausible resolution to…

It is shown that the proposal of Ref. [1] of Casimir repulsion and nanolevitation based on chiral metamaterials is incompatible with the passivity and causality of the materials.

This reply addresses concerns expressed in a comment (arXiv:2508.16689v1) on arXiv:submit/6841332 [physics.gen-ph] 29 Sep 2025 the paper given in the title (arXiv:2501.02022v2), hereafter referred to as the paper.

We argue that the appropriate variable to study a non trivial geometry dependence of the Casimir force is the lateral component of the Casimir force, which we evaluate between two corrugated metallic plates outside the validity of the…

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

In this communication we refute a criticism concerning results of our work [3] that was presented in references [1] and [2].

A comment on the letter by M. Machida and T. Koyama, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 94}, 140401 (2005) and also on the preprint by Y. Kawaguchi and T. Ohmi, cond-mat/0411018.

Certain comments on the paper of Yu.V. Orlov, B. F. Irgaziev and L. I. Nikitina published in Phys.At.Nuclei, {\bf 73} (2010) 757 are made.

We provide a reply to a comment by I. Goychuk arXiv:1501.06996 [cond-mat.stat-mech] (not under active consideration with Phys. Rev. Lett.) on our Letter A. Rebenshtok, S. Denisov, P. H\"anggi, and E. Barkai, {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf…

This is an addendum to the Reply Comment [Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 139602 (2009), arXiv:0811.0518] to Comment [Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 139601 (2009), arXiv:0810.4791] on Letter [Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 116101 (2008), arXiv:0804.1898].