相关论文: Reply to the comment "quant-ph/9710002"

We argue that the claim given in quant-ph/9801014 remains untenable in the revised version. The fallacy in the proof is a misinterpretation of the no-cloning and teleportation theorems, which do not involve time and reference frames.

We point out several superficialities in Itano's comment (quant-ph/0211165).

Benenti et al. recently submitted a Comment (arXiv:0912.3667) on our work "Coherent Ratchets in Driven Bose-Einstein condensates". We show that the main claim of the Comment is wrong, and correct some other misunderstandings presented…

There are some points in the reply of Horton et al. [http://stacks.iop.org/JPhysA/35/7963] to my comment [quant-ph/0202140] on their paper [quant-ph/0103114] which I cannot let stand without a response. I provide here some clarification of…

First version: del Barco et al. submitted recently a comment [arXiv:0812.4070] on our latest Phys. Rev. Lett. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 237204 (2008)], claiming three basic mistakes. We show here that their claims are unjustified and based on…

We show that, contrarily to the claims in [K. Bradler, (2011), arXiv:1108.5553] (and arXiv:1201.1045), the reference [Phys. Rev. A 83, 062323 (2011)] is devoid of flaws or mistakes. We show that the criticism comes from a misunderstanding…

We show that the argument in Phys Rev Lett 70 (1993) 1360 is correct and consistent, and that Hagen & Sudarshan's solution has inconsistency leading to non-vanishing commutators of $[P^1, P^2]$ and $[P^j, H]$ even in physical states. This…

We refute criticisms by Del Santo and Horvat towards our paper "Quantum principle of relativity": most of their counterarguments can be dismissed, and the rest provides further evidence to our claims.

Herein I respond to the criticism and to the complains by Benestad (Pattern Recogn. Phys. 1, 91-92, 2013, http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/prp-1-91-2013) of Scafetta (Pattern Recogn. Phys. 1, 37-57, 2013, http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/prp-1-37-2013)…

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.

An attempt is made to remedy confusing treatments of some basic relativistic concepts and results in recent papers by Franklin (2010 {\it Eur. J. Phys.} {\bf 31} 291-8) and by McGlynn and van Kampen (2008 {\it Eur. J. Phys.} {\bf 29}…

This Reply to preceding Comment of arXiv:1909.09867 shows why the statements in the Comment are misleading. We point out that our physical picture and theirs are fundamentally different, therefore the claim of using their correlation to…

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.

We remark on the validity of the concerns raised in the comment(cond-mat/0304626) by Fal'ko, Lerner, Tsyplyatyev, and Aleiner..

In response to the recent critical comment by M. Mel\'endez and W. G. Hoover [arXiv:1206.0188v2] on our work [M. Campisi et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 250601 (2012)], we show that their molecular dynamics simulations do not disprove our…

Reply to the recent comment by I.Ispolatov and M.Karttunen, cond-mat/0303564

We reply to the recent comments on our published papers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (2012) 152005 and Phys. Lett. B717 (2012) 214. We point out that the criticisms about the transverse polarization parton sum rule we obtained are invalid.

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

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…

In this note we comment on the RG flow of the Newton and cosmological constants, also in view of some recent claims [1] that would rise some doubts on the validity of our recent work [2,3]. Here we show that the arguments and claims of [1]…