Related papers: Sonoluminescence as Quantum Vacuum Radiation, Repl…

The insufficiency of the energy radiated in the model of Eberlein is discussed.

We contest the recent claim by C. Eberlein (Physical Review Letters 76 (1996) 3842) that sonoluminescence may be explained in terms of quantum vacuum radiation. Due to fundamental physical limitations on bubble surface velocity, the…

Sonoluminescence is explained in terms of quantum radiation by moving interfaces between media of different polarizability. It can be considered as a dynamic Casimir effect, in the sense that it is a consequence of the imbalance of the…

We argue that the available experimental data is not compatible with models of sonoluminescence which invoke dynamical properties of the interface without regard to the compositional properties of the trapped gas inside the bubble.

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

In a paper recently published in Science, Taleyarkhan et al. claimed to observe fusion from acoustic cavitation and the associated phenomenon of sonoluminescence. Although, this is a worthwhile line of investigation we explain why, in our…

Short remarks on the problem of assigning frequency spectra to Casimir, sonoluminescence, Hawking, Unruh, and quantum optical squeezing effects are presented

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

Sonoluminescence is explained in terms of quantum radiation by moving interfaces between media of different polarizability. In a stationary dielectric the zero-point fluctuations of the electromagnetic field excite virtual two-photon states…

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

Comment on A.F. Abouraddy, P.R. Stone, A.V. Sergienko, B.E.A. Saleh, and M.C. Teich, ``Entangled-Photon Imaging of a Pure Phase Object,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 213903 (2004). Unpublished (rejected by Physical Review Letters), but for a…

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

A Comment on the Letter by O. Viehmann, J. von Delft, and F. Marquardt [Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 107}, 113602 (2011)].

We argue whether physics of universal approach of Severyukhin et al. [arXiv:1703.05710] is approved.

The Response [J. Chem. Phys. 160, 187102 (2024)] of Inoue and coworkers to my Comment [J. Chem. Phys. 160, 187101 (2024)] on their original paper [J. Chem. Phys. 159, 054105 (2023)] clarifies some points put forward in my Comment, but also…

I reply to a Comment by Q. Wang and W.G. Unruh regarding my paper "Hiding the Cosmological Constant" [Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 131302].

In a companion paper [quant-ph/9904013] we have investigated several variations of Schwinger's proposed mechanism for sonoluminescence. We demonstrated that any realistic version of Schwinger's mechanism must depend on extremely rapid…

Reply to the Comment physics/0307134 by A. Helmstetter and D. Sornette

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…