Physical Review A

Reply to ‘‘Comment on ‘Generalized saddle-point method for Feshbach resonances’ ’’

Mirosłlaw Bylicki

Published Apr 1, 1990• 10 citations

Abstract

It is argued that the saddle-point method developed by Chung [Phys. Rev. A 20, 1743 (1979)] may be considered in the category of orthogonalization to the open-channel space, and that the generalization of the method introduced by Bylicki offers a precise prescription for implementation of the original formulation by Chung.

DOI: 10.1103/physreva.41.4093

Related papers

Comment on ‘‘Generalized saddle-point method for Feshbach resonances’’

Kwong T. Chung

In the recent article by M. Bylicki [Phys. Rev. A 39, 3316 (1989)], many remarks were made concerning the saddle-point technique developed by this author. These remarks appear to have been based on a misunderstanding of both the spirit as well as the actual application of this method. In this Comment, I shall try to clarify some of these misunderstandings, and one hopes, put the problem in its proper perspective.

Physical Review AApr 1, 199019 citations

Comment on the Comment on Deformation of Quantum Mechanics

You‐Quan Li, Zheng-Mao Sheng

This is a reply to the comment by Chung and Chung [J. Phys. A27 (1994) 5037]. We point out that the discussion there is imperfect.

Communications in Theoretical PhysicsOct 30, 19950 citations

Reply to “Comment on ‘Feshbach resonances in an optical lattice’ ”

D. B. M. Dickerscheid, D. van Oosten, Henk T. C. Stoof

We show that the Comment by Diener and Ho [Phys. Rev. A 73, 017601 (2006)] is based on the misunderstanding that the Hamiltonian used by Dickerscheid et al. to describe Feshbach resonances in an optical lattice is a microscopic Hamiltonian as opposed to an effective Hamiltonian.

Physical Review AJan 4, 20067 citations

Comment on “Feshbach resonances in an optical lattice”

Roberto B. Diener, Tin-Lun Ho

We point out some logical inconsistencies in the model proposed in [Phys. Rev. A 71, 043604 (2005)] as well as in the calculations performed on it. The proposed model is not able to describe Feshbach resonances in optical lattices.

arXiv:cond-mat/0507255Physical Review AJan 4, 200610 citations

Reply to "Comment on 'Modified quantum-speed-limit bounds for open quantum dynamics in quantum channels'"

Xin Liu, Wei Wu, Chao Wang

The authors of the comment[Phys. Rev. A 97, 046101 (2018)] raise that the inconsistency in calculating some common quantum-speed-limit (QSL) bounds, which is presented in our paper [Phys. Rev. A 95, 052118 (2017)], does not exist in their paper [Phys. Rev. A 94, 052125 (2016)]. Therefore they insist that their criticism to some QSL bounds is still valid. We demonstrate all the QSL bounds mentioned in the comment are similar in essence. We also show the inconsistency which is presented in their original paper can not be used to support their criticism. Furthermore, we exhibit although the inconsistency presented in our paper is not a same one to which is presented by the authors of the comment, it exists and be unavoidable in their example. Accordingly, we believe the result in our paper is usable in numerical calculations.

arXiv:1805.01986May 5, 20180 citations

Reply to “Comment on ‘Coherent-state path integrals in the continuum’”

G. Kordas, S. I. Mistakidis, A. I. Karanikas

In this Reply we briefly clarify the main points of our method to construct coherent-state path integrals in the continuum and we reply to the critique raised by in the preceding Comment by Kochetov [Phys. Rev. A 99, 026101 (2019)]. By using definite examples, we prove that our approach is capable of resolving the inconsistencies accompanying the standard coherent-state path-integral representation of interacting systems.

Physical Review AFeb 13, 20193 citations