Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:cond-mat/0105433 · Physical Review Letters

Kolomeisky, Newman, Straley, and Qi Reply:

Eugene B. Kolomeisky, T. J. Newman, Joseph P. Straley, Xiaoya Qi

Published May 14, 2001• 9 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

This is a published reply to the comment of Bhaduri and Sen, Physical Review Letters 86, 4708 (2001), cond-mat/0105385, on our original work, Physical Review Letters 85, 1146 (2000), cond-mat/0002282 . In this reply we point out that our continuum theory captures the correct physics of non-interacting fermions in one dimension. In contrast, the two proposed alternative theories of Bhaduri and Sen produce physically incorrect results. We take this opportunity to point out that the abstract of cond-mat/0105385 obscures the contents of the comment and reply. The soliton solutions found in our theory are the continuum analogs of solitonic states which are known from exact studies of non-interacting fermions.

DOI
10.1103/physrevlett.86.4709

Related papers

Comment on “Low-Dimensional Bose Liquids: Beyond the Gross-Pitaevskii Approximation”

R. K. Bhaduri, Diptiman Sen

This is a comment on the work of Kolomeisky et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1146 (2000). We point out that they are using the wrong form of the energy functional for one-dimensional fermions. We point out two possible forms of the energy functional, both of which can be derived from first principles but using different methods. One is obtained from the collective field theory method, while the other is derived from the extended Thomas-Fermi method. These two forms of the energy functional do not support the soliton solutions which are obtained by Kolomeisky et al.

arXiv:cond-mat/0105385•Physical Review Letters•May 14, 2001•5 citations

Reply to the Comment on "Bound States in the One-dimensional Hubbard Model"

Daniel Braak, Natan Andrei

We reply to the comment (cond-mat/9806125) by Essler, Goehmann and Korepin, and show that their points are unfounded.

arXiv:cond-mat/9806225•Jun 18, 1998•0 citations

Comment on “A New Class of Exactly Solvable Interacting Fermion Models in One Dimension”

Andrei A. Zvyagin

A Comment on the Letter by H. J. Schulz and B. Sriram Shastry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 1924 (1998). The authors of the Letter offer a Reply.Received 10 March 1998DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.82.2409©1999 American Physical Society

Physical Review Letters•Mar 15, 1999•6 citations

Comment on "Strongly interacting one-dimensional Bose-Einstein condensates in harmonic traps"

Marvin D. Girardeau, Ewan M. Wright

A recent paper of Tanatar and Erkan [Phys. Rev. A 62, 053601 (2000)] discusses a density functional approach to the impenetrable point Bose gas in one dimension and an equation for the order parameter of the system, due originally to Kolomeisky et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1146 (2000)], is derived. We comment on the regime of validity of such a model and on qualitative differences between predictions of the density functional approach and known exact results.

arXiv:cond-mat/0010457•Oct 27, 2000•2 citations

Reply to Comment on "Stripes and the t-J Model"

C. Stephen Hellberg, Efstratios Manousakis

This is a Reply to the Comment of S.R. White and D.J. Scalapino [cond-mat/9907243] on our recent paper ``Stripes and the t-J Model'' [Physical Review Letters 83, 132 (1999) and cond-mat/9812022].

arXiv:cond-mat/9910142•Oct 9, 1999•0 citations

"Symmetry properties of magnetization in the Hubbard model at finite temperature": Comment on 'Reply to Comment'

Adolfo Avella, Francesco Paolo Mancini, D. Villani

We comment on the Reply of G. Su and M. Suzuki [cond-mat/9808011] to our Comment [cond-mat/9807402] about the papers of G. Su [Phys. Rev. B 54, 8291 (1996)] and G. Su and M. Suzuki [Phys. Rev. B 57, 13367 (1998)]. The algebraic mistake originating their incorrect solutions is evidenced in detail.

arXiv:cond-mat/9808109•Aug 11, 1998•0 citations
This is a published reply to the comment of Bhaduri and Sen, Physical Review Letters 86, 4708 (2001), cond-mat/0105385, on our original work, Physical Review Letters 85, 1146 (2000), cond-mat/0002282 . In this reply we point out that our continuum theory captures the correct physics of non-interacting fermions in one dimension. In contrast, the two proposed alternative theories of Bhaduri and Sen produce physically incorrect results. We take this opportunity to point out that the abstract of cond-mat/0105385 obscures the contents of the comment and reply. The soliton solutions found in our theory are the continuum analogs of solitonic states which are known from exact studies of non-interacting fermions.
This is a comment on the work of Kolomeisky et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1146 (2000). We point out that they are using the wrong form of the energy functional for one-dimensional fermions. We point out two possible forms of the energy functional, both of which can be derived from first principles but using different methods. One is obtained from the collective field theory method, while the other is derived from the extended Thomas-Fermi method. These two forms of the energy functional do not support the soliton solutions which are obtained by Kolomeisky et al.