Related papers: Reply to ``Comment on ``Lateral Casimir Force beyo…
This paper replies the comment by E. Kapuscik [Am. J. Phys. 77, 754 (2009)]
This article is divided in three sections. In the first section we briefly review some high precision experiments on the Casimir force, underlying an important aspect of the analysis of the data. In the second section we discuss our recent…
Reply to the comment by D.N. Aristov and A.G. Yashenkin (cond-mat/9612245) on PRL by Balatsky and Salkola (Phys. Rev. Lett., V76, 2386, (1996), cond-mat/9602034).
We study the lateral Casimir force experienced by a particle that rotates near a planar surface. The origin of this force lies in the symmetry breaking induced by the particle rotation in the vacuum and thermal fluctuations of its dipole…
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.
A recent e-print (cond-mat/0604532) presented a proposed Comment to Applied Physics Letters on our publication Appl. Phys. Lett. 88, 162503 (2006), cond-mat/0603260. Here is our Response. As the proposed Comment has now been rejected by…
Comment on cond-mat/0205390; PRL 90, 026805 (2003)
The lateral Casimir force between two corrugated metallic plates makes possible a study of the nontrivial interplay of geometry and Casimir effect appearing beyond the regime of validity of the Proximity Force Approximation (PFA).…
We comment on S. Carlip's recent Letter "Hiding the Cosmological Constant" [Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 131302].
In a recent Comment, Decca et al. [Phys. Rev. A 79, 026101 (2009); arXiv:0809.3576] discussed the origin of the anomalies recently reported by us in Phys. Rev. A 78, 036102(R) (2008); arXiv:0812.0028 . Here we restate our view, corroborated…
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…
This is a short communication in reference to the comments in (arXiv: 1605.05147) of our paper in Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 25, 1650051 (2016). We have tried to answer to the comments or criticism in the paper.
We apply the result of Kenneth and I. Klich, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 160401 (2006) to derive a theorem for two objects coupled to a Dirac field. We demonstrate that a sufficient condition for the Casimir interaction to be repulsive, is for…
We reply to comment on recent paper by Pieplow and Henkel (New J. Phys. 15 (2013) 023027) and our results made by Volokitin and Persson (arXiv: 1405.2525)
Recently D. Garcia-Sanches, K. Y. Fong, H. Bhaskaran, S. Lamoreaux, and H. X. Tang [Phys. Rev. Lett. v.109, 027202 (2012)] claimed that the frequency shift of an oscillator under the influence of the residual electric and Casimir forces is…
A reply to arXiv:0809.2310, "Comment on Universal Charge-Radius Relation for Subatomic and Astrophysical Compact Objects" [arXiv:0804.2140,PRL100(2008)151102]
This is our formal Reply to revised version (v2) of arXiv: nucl-th/0510004v2.
This paper is in response to a recent comment by Bellissard [arXiv:1704.02644] on the paper [Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 130201 (2017)]. It is explained that the issues raised in the comment have already been discussed in the paper and do not…
We reply to P. Forg\'acs, T. Herpay, and P. Kov\'acs (arXiv: 1202.6289).
This is the Reply to the revised Comment [Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 139601; arXiv:0810.4791] by Joachim Krug on our paper: C. Escudero, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 116101 (2008); arXiv:0804.1898.