Abstract:In a recent comment, M. Akbari-Moghanjoughi [Phys. Plasmas 17, 114701 (2010)] (whom we will refer to as A.M.) pointed out that in the quantum hydrodynamics plasma model the parameters p (the fractional positron to ion number density) and σ (the relative positron to electron Fermi temperature) are not independent quantum plasma parameters which has important consequences on the graphical interpretations presented in our article. We agree with A.M. that the phase shift cannot be plotted in a σ-p plane and the value of p=0.2 does not correspond to σ=0.02. However, the main results given by formulas and the conclusion in our paper [S.-C. Li, Phys. Plasmas 17, 082307 (2010)] are independent of the figures and remain valid. To understand and interpret the results obtained in our previous article correctly, in this response, we will show some new figures and make some discusses.

Reply to ‘‘comment on ‘Kinetic-Energy Density Functional for a Special Shape-Invariant Potential of a One-Dimensional Two-Level System’ ’’

Comment on the Comment on Deformation of Quantum-Mechanics

Qin Et Al. Reply

Gao et al. Reply

Li and Wang Reply:

Qianet Al.reply:

Chen, Gong, and Wei Reply:

Yanet Al.reply:

Hou<i>et al.</i>Reply:

Yaoet Al.reply:

Reznikovet Al.reply:

Reply to the "Comment on `Effect of density and nucleon-nucleon potential on the fusion cross section within the relativistic mean field formalism'"

Xiang et al. reply.

Response to Comment on 'The effects of Bohm potential on ion-acoustic solitary waves interaction in a nonplanar quantum plasma '

Ji, Lu, and Gao Reply:

Comment on “correlation Quantum Dynamics Between an Electron Andd2+molecule with Attosecond Resolution”

Luoet Al.reply:

Kinetic-energy functional of the electron density

Comment on: "Analytical solutions to the Schrödinger equation for a generalized Cornell potential and its applications to diatomic molecules and heavy mesons"

Wexleret Al.reply:

Linet Al.reply: