相关论文: Comments on astro-ph/0305039 and gr-qc/0309036

In eprint gr-qc/9901053 Gen Yoneda and Hisa-aki Shinkai have made several claims disputing our results in gr-qc/9710004, and gr-qc/9804019. We show here that these claims are not correct.

This paper was withdrawn by the authors because it has been supplanted by gr-qc/0311007 and gr-qc/0311038.

This is no longer available.

A Reply to the criticisms contained in astro-ph/9612003 is provided and a logical inconsistency in astro-ph/9612214 is pointed out.

The results in the recently posted manuscript arXiv:math/0405153v3 are incorrect. The correct version of the aimed results is not original. The preprint contains material from references that are not properly quoted.

We show that some mathematical results and their negations are both deducible. The derived contradictions indicate the inconsistency of current mathematics. This paper is an updated version of arXiv:math/0606635v3 with additional results…

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

Samuely et al. (cond-mat/0503153) make the strong claim that our letter is 'contradicting several established experimental results'. As we will show below this is not justified and the claims from are based on a misinterpretation of our…

We show that results obtained in paper Foundations of Physics 33, No. 7, 1107 (2003), are not correct.

The content of gr-qc/9805003 and gr-qc/9806091 now appears in a single paper in the archive under gr-qc/9805003, since these appeared as a single publication in Physical Review Letters.

Here we respond to the comment by Tsagas (gr-qc/0503042) on our paper gr-qc/0503006. We show that the results in that comment are flawed and cannot be used for drawing conclusion about the nature of magnetic field amplification by…

This paper has been withdrawn because the new one gr-qc/0512095 includes all its results (as well as those in gr-qc/0511016) in a clearer way.

Paper withdrawn. Replaced by by gr-qc/0212077 .

I refute the criticisms of hep-ph/0311241 raised in hep-ph/0312151.

It is noted that some results of the author's research papers cited in the comprehensive review paper "The Science of Sungrazers, Sunskirters, and Other Near-Sun Comets" by G. H. Jones et al. (2018) have been factually misrepresented. The…

It is shown in detail why the arguments put forward by Struyve and Baere (quant-ph/0108038) against my conclusions are incorrect.

A recent Comment [arXiv:0811.2790] on the Letter 'Quantum Bounce and Cosmic Recall' by the authors is shown to arise from an incorrect understanding of the issues at hand and of our analysis. The conclusions of Bojowald's Comment are shown…

Withdrawn; replaced by longer, more detailed paper quant-ph/0010065.

We point out that the claim of strong universality in the paper J.Phys. A 44, 015002, arXiv:1011.3321 is incorrect, as it contradicts known rigorous results.

We show that the comment [cond-mat/0408217] by Continentino on our recent paper [PRL 91, 066404 (2003), cond-mat/0212335] reaches incorrect conclusions as the comment wrongly extrapolates from results valid close to a classical phase…