Chemical Physics Letters

Reply to the Comment on ‘The correspondence between quantum and classical mechanics: An experimental demonstration of the smooth transition between the two regimes’ [Chem. Phys. Lett. 402 (2005) 519]

Anthony J. Horsewill

Published Nov 29, 2006• 4 citations

DOI: 10.1016/j.cplett.2006.11.083

Related papers

Comment on ‘The correspondence between quantum and classical mechanics: An experimental demonstration of the smooth transition between the two regimes’ [Chem. Phys. Lett. 402 (2005) 519]

Lidia Latanowicz, Eduard C. Reynhardt

Chemical Physics LettersNov 29, 20069 citations

Reply to Comment on: “On the ‘standard’ quantum-mechanical approach to times of arrival” [Phys. Lett. A 313 (2003) 498]

C. Richard Leavens

Physics Letters AAug 11, 200516 citations

Reply to comment on ‘Multiple quantum coherences in liquid state NMR and nonlinear optics; collective vs. local origin’ [Chem. Phys. Lett. 357 (2002) 327]

Shaul Mukamel

Chemical Physics LettersJan 1, 20034 citations

Response to “Comment on ‘Equivalence of two approaches for quantum-classical hybrid systems’ ” [J. Chem. Phys. 131, 127101 (2009)]

Fei Zhan, Yuan Lin, Biao Wu

The Journal of Chemical PhysicsSep 28, 20090 citations

Comment on “Experimental Demonstration of a Quantum Protocol for Byzantine Agreement and Liar Detection”

Fei Gao, Fen-Zhuo Guo, Qiaoyan Wen +1 more

A Comment on the Letter by [Sascha Gaertner et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 070504 (2008)]. The authors of the Letter offer a Reply.Received 21 April 2008DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.208901©2008 American Physical Society

Physical Review LettersNov 13, 2008154 citations

Comment on: “Critical assessment of the Schrödinger picture of quantum mechanics”

Hrvoje Nikolić

arXiv:quant-ph/0309136Physics Letters AApr 24, 20041 citation