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

A Comment on the paper "Conservative Quantum Computing" by M. Ozawa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 057902 (2002). The author replies in Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 089802 (2003).

We make comments on Gaidarzhy {\it et al.}'s [{\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} 94, 030402 (2005)] letter.

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

Results of a 2012 PRL Letter have recently been questioned by T. Kalaydzhyan in arXiv:1604.04486. Here we confirm our original results and conclusions by addressing all concerns raised in the Comment.

We comment on the recent work [1], and on its relations with our papers [2,3] cited therein. In particular we show that, contrarily to what stated in [1], the Casimir energy density determined therein in the case of a single delta-like…

The Comment by Xiong et al. (arXiv:1610.06275) criticizing my Letter [Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 133903 (2016)] was rejected by Physical Review Letters. In this Reply, I show that all their claims are wrong.

We offer a clarification of the significance of the indicated paper of H. Cheng. Cheng's conclusions about the attractive nature of Casimir forces between parallel plates are valid beyond the particular model in which he derived them; they…

comment on cond-mat/97063007 and cond-mat/9707289

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 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 have reviewed the Comment of Geyer et al. [arXiv:0708.1548] concerning our recent work [Phys. Rev. A 75, 060102 (R) (2007)], and while we disagree with their criticisms, we acknowledge them for giving us the opportunity to add…

The recently suggested modification of the transverse electric contribution to the Lifshitz formula (S. K. Lamoreaux, arXiv:0801.1283) is discussed. We show that this modification is inconsistent with the data of two precise experiments,…

We reply to the comments on our previous paper Physical Review Letters, Vol. 129, 087001 (2022), raised by Th\'eo S\'epulcre, Serge Florens, and Izak Snyman in arXiv:2210.00742.

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…

We address the issues raised in [R. Tadmor et al., Langmuir 2020, 36, 475-476]. In particular, we explain why we did not use Tadmor's theory to explain our results.

A brief review of the recent experimental verifications of the Casimir force between extended bodies is presented. With modern techniques, it now appears feasible to test the force law with 1% precision; I will address the issues relating…

I show that the main statement of [Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 094802 (2010), arXiv:1005.2617] is wrong. Other inconsistences of this Letter are also discussed.

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.

It is shown that the recent criticism of Brevik et al. (hep-th/0004041) is in error.

The widely-adopted proximity-force approximation (PFA) to estimate normal Casimir forces is known to be asymptotically exact at vanishing separations. In this letter, we propose a correction to the PFA, which is sufficiently accurate in…