Reply to the Comment on "Evidence for Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay" [Mod. Phys. Lett. A 16(2001)2409]

H.L. Harney

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.hep-ph/0205293

2002-05-25

Abstract:As a coauthor of the article mentioned in the title, I discuss the criticism in the comment of Aalseth et al. Part of the criticism is justified.

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Comment on "Structure of the two-neutrino double-β decay matrix elements within perturbation theory" by Dušan Štefánik, Fedor Šimkovic, Amand Faessler, <a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="1506.00835" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1506.00835">arXiv:1506.00835</a> [nucl-th], Phys.Rev.C91 (2015) 6, 064311

Vadim Rodin,O.A. Rumyantsev,M.H. Urin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1512.02466

2015-12-08

Abstract:We comment on a priority claim given by the authors of Phys.Rev.C91 (2015) 6, 064311.

Nuclear Theory
Reply to the comment "quant-ph/9710002"

Lu-Ming Duan,Guang-Can Guo

1997-01-01

Abstract: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.
Comment on: "The interaction of neutrons with 7Be at BBN temperatures: Lack of Standard Nuclear Solution to the Primordial 7Li Problem" by M. Gai et al

M. Paul,R. Dressler,U. Koester,D. Schumann

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2008.06049

2020-10-28

Abstract:The article recently published by M. Gai et al. claims to reach conclusions from a collaborative experiment dedicated to the study of the 7Be(n,alpha) reaction. These claims were published with no authorization from key collaborators, including a PI of the experiment. The Authors of the present Comment reject the conclusions of M. Gai et et al. and condemn the scientific and ethical misconduct involved in their publication. A formal Comment, similarly expressing the Authors' rejection of these conclusions was submitted to EPJ Web of Conferences who published the above article.

Nuclear Experiment
Reply to Comment on "Neutrino oscillations originate from virtual excitation of Z bosons" and "Neutrinos produced from $β$ decays of neutrons cannot be in coherent superpositions of different mass eigenstates"

Shi-Biao Zheng

2024-10-17

Abstract:In this reply, I point out that the comment by Cline (<a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="2410.05826" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.05826">arXiv:2410.05826</a>) on my manuscripts (<a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="2407.00954" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.00954">arXiv:2407.00954</a> and <a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="2410.03133" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.03133">arXiv:2410.03133</a>) has overlooked the critical fact that the quantum entanglement between the neutrino's mass and other degrees of freedom would destroy the quantum coherence between the mass eigenstates.

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology,Quantum Physics
Qin Et Al. Reply

Nan Qin,Emmanuelle Le Chatelier,Jing Guo,Edi Prifti,Lanjuan Li,S. Dusko Ehrlich

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14852

IF: 64.8

2015-01-01

Nature

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by J. H. Chen and H. Y. Fan.Received 22 May 2013DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.269502© 2013 American Physical Society
A Comment on "The possible explanation of neutron lifetime beam anomaly" by A. P. Serebrov, et al

F. E. Wietfeldt,R. Biswas,R. W. Haun,M. S. Dewey,J. Caylor,N. Fomin,G. L. Greene,C. C. Haddock,S. F. Hoogerheide,H. P. Mumm,J. S. Nico,B. Crawford,W. M. Snow

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2004.01165

2020-04-03

Abstract:We comment on a recent manuscript by A. P. Serebrov, et al. regarding residual gas charge exchange in the beam neutron lifetime experiment

Nuclear Experiment,Instrumentation and Detectors
Reply to the Comment "Past of a quantum particle and weak measurement"

Lev Vaidman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1310.1319

2013-10-04

Abstract:Misinterpretation in the preceding Comment of my recent analysis of the past of a photon is corrected. There is nothing in this analysis which is "contrary to the usual quantum expectations" but, nevertheless, it does provide "further understanding and interpretation of the system considered". In particular, it teaches us that the naive common sense argument frequently used in the literature including the Comment has to be abandoned.

Quantum Physics
Reply to Comment on "No Black Holes from Light" [

Álvaro Álvarez-Domínguez,Luis J. Garay,Eduardo Martín-Martínez,José Polo-Gómez

2024-08-21

Abstract:We discuss how the comment by A. Loeb [<a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="2408.06714" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.06714">arXiv:2408.06714</a>] has no bearing on the results of Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 041401 (2024) [<a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="2405.02389" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.02389">arXiv:2405.02389</a>].

General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology,High Energy Physics - Theory,Quantum Physics
Gao et al. Reply

Hong-Jun Gao,Karl Sohlberg,Z. Q. Xue,H. Y. Chen,S. M. Hou,L. P. Ma,X. W. Fang,Stephen J. Pennycook

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.87.179707

IF: 8.6

2001-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by Yanming Zhao et al.Received 2 June 2001DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.179707©2001 American Physical Society
Comment on "Final CONUS results on coherent elastic neutrino nucleus scattering at the Brokdorf reactor"

J.I. Collar,C.M. Lewis

2024-08-02

Abstract:We describe several omissions and deficiencies in the arguments presented by Ackermann et al. (<a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="2401.07684" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.07684">arXiv:2401.07684</a>), pointing at missing information necessary to back up its conclusions.

High Energy Physics - Experiment,High Energy Physics - Phenomenology,Nuclear Experiment,Instrumentation and Detectors
Reply to the Comment, <a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="0810.3243v1" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/0810.3243v1">arXiv:0810.3243v1</a> by B. Geyer, G. L. Klimchitskaya, U. Mohideen, and. V. M. Mostepanenko

L. P. Pitaevskii

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.0811.3081

2008-11-19

Abstract:It is shown that criticism of my paper <a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="0801.0656" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/0801.0656">arXiv:0801.0656</a> Phys. Rev. Lett, vol. 101, 163202 (2008) by the authors of Comment <a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="0810.3243v1" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/0810.3243v1">arXiv:0810.3243v1</a> is wrong and that their main arguments are in contradiction with established concepts of statistical physics.

Statistical Mechanics
Xiang et al. reply.

H J Xiang,Bing Huang,Erjun Kan,Su-Huai Wei,X G Gong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.112.199802

IF: 8.6

2014-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by M. Amsler et al.Received 4 December 2013DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.199802© 2014 American Physical Society
Comments on "On the Dirac-Majorana neutrinos distinction in four-body decays" (

C. S. Kim,M. V. N. Murthy,Dibyakrupa Sahoo

2024-03-25

Abstract:In <a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="2305.14140" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.14140">arXiv:2305.14140</a> [hep-ph] the authors analyze the radiative leptonic decay $\ell^- \to \nu_\ell \, \overline{\nu}_{\ell'} \, \ell^{\prime -} \, \gamma$ to distinguish between Dirac and Majorana nature of neutrinos. They utilize the back-to-back kinematics for this purpose, a special kinematic configuration which we first proposed in our paper <a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="2106.11785" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.11785">arXiv:2106.11785</a> [hep-ph]. Here we point out how and why their analysis of the back-to-back configuration is incorrect. This makes their conclusion and comments invalid and untenable.

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology
Reply to Comment on "Quantum Force in a Superconductor"

A.V.Nikulov

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.cond-mat/0304313

2003-04-14

Abstract:A reply is made to Comment by <a class="link-external link-http" href="http://D.P.Sheehan" rel="external noopener nofollow">this http URL</a> in which he takes notice that the quantum force introduced in my earlier paper <a class="link-external link-http" href="http://A.V.Nikulov" rel="external noopener nofollow">this http URL</a>, Phys. Rev. B 64, 012505 (2001) challenges to the absolute status of the second law of thermodynamics. It is shown that the introduction of the quantum force explains only an experimental challenge to the second law. The observation of the persistent current at non-zero resistance R > 0 is experimental evidence of violation of the postulate saving the second law in the beginning of the 20 century. According to this postulate any Brownian motion is absolutely random whereas the persistent current at R > 0 is a regulated Brownian motion.

Superconductivity,Statistical Mechanics
Comment on "An improved upper limit on the neutrino mass from a direct kinematic method by KATRIN"

Alan Chodos

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1909.08207

2019-09-18

Abstract:We note that the central value of the KATRIN measurement has negative mass squared, and wonder why the statistical analysis excludes such values a priori.

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology
Response to Comment on "Dark Matter Annihilation Can Produce a Detectable Antihelium Flux through $\barΛ_b$ Decays"

Martin Wolfgang Winkler,Tim Linden

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2106.00053

2021-06-01

Abstract:In a recent paper we showed that the decay of intermediate $\bar{\Lambda}_b$ baryons can dramatically enhance the antihelium flux from dark matter annihilation. Our antihelium predictions were derived using several implementations of the Pythia and Herwig event generators which were calibrated to existing data on antideuteron and antihelium formation. Kachelriess et al. have argued for a smaller antihelium flux compared to our most optimistic Monte Carlo model. However, we show that the arguments by Kachelriess et al. are either incorrect or irrelevant for antihelium formation. Thus, the results of our original paper remain unchanged.

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology
Falsifying Baryogenesis with Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay

Lukas Graf

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1605.01099

2016-05-04

Abstract:We discuss the relation between lepton number violation at high and low energies, particularly, the constraints on baryogenesis models, which would be implied by an observation of neutrinoless double beta decay. The primordial baryon asymmetry can be washed out by effective lepton number violating operators triggering neutrinoless double beta decay in combination with sphaleron processes. A generic conclusion is that popular models of baryogenesis are excluded if a non-standard mechanism of neutrinoless double beta decay, i.e., other than the standard light neutrino exchange, is observed. Apart from the effective field approach, we also outline the possible extension of our arguments to a general UV-completed model.

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology
Double Beta Decay, Nuclear Structure and Physics beyond the Standard Model

Amand Faessler

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/337/1/012065

2011-04-19

Abstract:Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay ($0\nu\beta\beta$) is presently the only known experiment to distinguisch between Dirac neutrinos, different from their antiparticles, and Majorana neutrinos, identical with their antiparticles. In addition $0\nu\beta\beta$ allows to determine the absolute scale of the neutrino masses. This is not possible with neutrino oscillations. To determine the neutrino masses one must assume, that the light Majorana neutrino exchange is the leading mechanism for $0\nu\beta\beta$ and that the matrix element of this transition can ba calculated reliably. The experimental $0\nu\beta\beta$ transition amplitude in this mechanism is a product of the light left handed effective Majorana neutrino mass and of this transition matrix element. The different methods, Quasi-particle Random Phase Approximation (QRPA), Shell Model (SM), Projected Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov (PHFB) and Interacting Boson Model (IBM2) used in the literature and the reliability of the matrix elements in these approaches are reviewed. In the second part it is investigated how one can determine the leading mechanism or mechanisms from the data of the $0\nu\beta\beta$ decay in different nuclei. Explicite expressions are given for the transition matrix elements. is shown, that possible interference terms allow to test CP (Charge and Parity conjugation) violation.

Nuclear Theory
Xiaoet Al.reply:

Di Xiao,Junren Shi,Qian Niu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.96.099702

IF: 8.6

2006-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:The Comment by Duval et al. [PRL 96, 099701 (2006)] addresses an important, but not the main, result of our Letter [PRL 95, 137204 (2005)]. It does not contradict our results in substance, and the only objection is really on the style of approach.

Reply to the Comment on "Evidence for Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay" [Mod. Phys. Lett. A 16(2001)2409]

Reply to the comment "quant-ph/9710002"

Comment on: "The interaction of neutrons with 7Be at BBN temperatures: Lack of Standard Nuclear Solution to the Primordial 7Li Problem" by M. Gai et al

Reply to Comment on "Neutrino oscillations originate from virtual excitation of Z bosons" and "Neutrinos produced from $β$ decays of neutrons cannot be in coherent superpositions of different mass eigenstates"

Qin Et Al. Reply

A Comment on "The possible explanation of neutron lifetime beam anomaly" by A. P. Serebrov, et al

Reply to the Comment "Past of a quantum particle and weak measurement"

Reply to Comment on "No Black Holes from Light" [

Gao et al. Reply

Comment on "Final CONUS results on coherent elastic neutrino nucleus scattering at the Brokdorf reactor"

Reply to the Comment, <a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="0810.3243v1" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/0810.3243v1">arXiv:0810.3243v1</a> by B. Geyer, G. L. Klimchitskaya, U. Mohideen, and. V. M. Mostepanenko

Xiang et al. reply.

Comments on "On the Dirac-Majorana neutrinos distinction in four-body decays" (

Reply to Comment on "Quantum Force in a Superconductor"

Comment on "An improved upper limit on the neutrino mass from a direct kinematic method by KATRIN"

Response to Comment on "Dark Matter Annihilation Can Produce a Detectable Antihelium Flux through $\barΛ_b$ Decays"

Falsifying Baryogenesis with Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay

Double Beta Decay, Nuclear Structure and Physics beyond the Standard Model

Xiaoet Al.reply: