Anandanet Al.reply:

Jeeva Anandan,Erik Sjöqvist,Arun K. Pati,Artur Ekert,Marie Ericsson,Daniel K. L. Oi,Vlatko Vedral

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.89.268902

IF: 8.6

2002-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by R. Bhandari.Received 14 May 2001DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.268902©2002 American Physical Society

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Wonet Al.reply:

C. Won,Y. Z. Wu,N. Kurahashi,H. W. Zhao,Z. Q. Qiu,A. Scholl,A. Doran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.94.039704

IF: 8.6

2005-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by P. J. Jensen et al.Received 19 March 2004DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.039704©2005 American Physical Society
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
Yaoet Al.reply:

Ke Yao,Martin Andersson,Tomas Brage,Roger Hutton,Per Jönsson,Yaming Zou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.104.209602

IF: 8.6

2007-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by Thad G. Walker and Charles J. Goebel.Received 5 February 2007DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.269304©2007 American Physical Society
Wexleret Al.reply:

Carlos Wexler,D. J. Thouless,Ping Ao,Qian Niu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.81.4277

IF: 8.6

1998-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by E. B. Sonin.Received 9 September 1998DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.4277©1998 American Physical Society
Linet Al.reply:

Lin Liu,Hsin‐Fei Meng,Jow-Tsong Shy,Sheng-Fu Horng,L. S. Yu,C. H. Chen,H. H. Liaw,Chun-Ming Huang,Kang‐Yung Peng,S. A. Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.92.059702

IF: 8.6

2004-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by M. Schott.Received 29 October 2003DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.059702©2004 American Physical Society
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
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
Houet Al.reply:

D. M. Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.85.2654

IF: 8.6

2000-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by J. I. Pascual, et al.Received 10 May 2000DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.2654©2000 American Physical Society
Sinha and Amaratunga Reply:

Dhiräj Sinha,G.A.J. Amaratunga

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.115.119702

IF: 8.6

2015-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:Received 6 August 2015DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.119702© 2015 American Physical Society
Zhanget Al.reply:

Hui Zhang,Jin-Ho Choi,Yang Xu,Xiuxia Wang,Xiaofang Zhai,Bing Wang,Changgan Zeng,Jun-Hyung Cho,Zhenyu Zhang,J. G. Hou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.107.019702

IF: 8.6

2011-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by Han Woong Yeom and Tae-Hwan Kim.Received 5 May 2011DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.019702© 2011 American Physical Society
Dong and Li Reply

J. K. Dong,Shiyan Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.104.259702

IF: 8.6

2010-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by Taichi Terashima et al.Received 14 May 2010DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.259702©2010 American Physical Society
Tang, Feng, and Golubovic Reply:

Chao Tang,Shechao Feng,Leonardo Golubovic

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.74.3500

IF: 8.6

1995-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by E. H. Brandt.Received 27 January 1995DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.3500©1995 American Physical Society
Comment on "Quantum waveguide array generator for performing Fourier transforms: Alternate route to quantum computing"

Daniel A. Lidar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/0308124

2003-08-22

Quantum Physics

Abstract:A Comment on the paper "Quantum waveguide array generator for performing Fourier transforms: Alternate route to quantum computing" by R. Akis and D.K. Ferry, Appl. Phys. Lett. 79, 2823 (2001). The authors reply in Appl. Phys. Lett. 80, 2420 (2002).
Zu et al. reply:.

C Zu,Y-X Wang,D-L Deng,X-Y Chang,K Liu,P-Y Hou,H-X Yang,L-M Duan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.110.078902

IF: 8.6

2013-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by E. Amselem et al.Received 4 December 2012DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.078902© 2013 American Physical Society
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
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.
Barbalinardo et al. Reply.

Giuseppe Barbalinardo,Zekun Chen,Haikuan Dong,Zheyong Fan,Davide Donadio

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.259602

IF: 8.6

2022-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:Received 28 January 2022Accepted 23 May 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.259602© 2022 American Physical SocietyPhysics Subject Headings (PhySH)Research AreasPhononsThermal conductivityPhysical SystemsCarbon-based materialsNanotubesNanowiresTechniquesBoltzmann theoryMolecular dynamicsCondensed Matter, Materials & Applied Physics
Comment on “magnus and Iordanskii Forces in Superfluids”

C Wexler,DJ Thouless,P Ao,Q Niu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.80.4356

IF: 8.6

1998-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Comment on the Letter by H. E. Hall and J. R. Hook, Phys. Rev. Lett 79, 1321 (1997). The authors of the Letter offer a Reply.Received 18 August 1997DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.80.4356©1998 American Physical Society
Addendum to the Reply Comment [Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 139602 (2009), <a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="0811.0518" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/0811.0518">arXiv:0811.0518</a>] on ''Dynamic Scaling of Non-Euclidean Interfaces''

Carlos Escudero

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.0907.0898

2009-07-06

Abstract:This is an addendum to the Reply Comment [Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 139602 (2009), <a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="0811.0518" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/0811.0518">arXiv:0811.0518</a>] to Comment [Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 139601 (2009), <a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="0810.4791" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/0810.4791">arXiv:0810.4791</a>] on Letter [Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 116101 (2008), <a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="0804.1898" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/0804.1898">arXiv:0804.1898</a>].

Statistical Mechanics,Mathematical Physics
Comment on "large Optical Nonlinearity of Semiconducting Single-Walled Carbon Nanotubes under Resonant Excitations".

C.-X. Sheng,Z. Valy Vardeny

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.96.019705

IF: 8.6

2006-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Comment on the Letter by A. Maeda et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 047404 (2005). The authors of the Letter offer a Reply.Received 3 May 2005DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.019705©2006 American Physical Society