arXiv:cond-mat/0302295 · Physical Review Letters

Henkel and Pleimling Reply:

Malte Henkel, Michel Pleimling

Published Mar 6, 2003• 18 citations

arXiv HTML PDF

Abstract

Reply to the Comment by F. Corberi, E. Lipiello and M. Zannetti (cond-mat/0211609).

DOI: 10.1103/physrevlett.90.099602

Related papers

Remarks on reply to Johansen's comment

Anders Sewerin Johansen

Remarks on reply (cond-mat/0206368) to Johansen's comment (cond-mat/0205249)

arXiv:cond-mat/0206479Jun 25, 20022 citations

Reply to the comment by C.Camacho on PRL, v.77, p.5433

Alexander Gutin, Victor Abkevich, Eugene I. Shakhnovich

In this brief reply we point out to some misconceptions in C.Camacho's comment (cond-mat/9701210).

arXiv:cond-mat/9703230Mar 26, 19970 citations

Hove and Sudbø Reply:

J. Hove, Asle Sudbø

A short Reply to the Comment of Prokof'ev and Svistunov, cond-mat/0504008, is given.

arXiv:cond-mat/0506023Physical Review LettersJun 1, 20063 citations

Reply to the comment by I.Ispolatov and M.Karttunen, cond-mat/0303564

D. H. E. Gross, E. V. Votyakov, Alessandro De Martino

Reply to the recent comment by I.Ispolatov and M.Karttunen, cond-mat/0303564

arXiv:cond-mat/0304013Apr 1, 20030 citations

Jönsson, Yoshino, and Nordblad Reply:

Petra E. Jönsson, Hajime Yoshino, П. Нордблад

Reply to the Comment by L. Berthier and J.-P. Bouchaud, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 059701 (2003), also cond-mat/0209165, on our paper Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 097201 (2002), also cond-mat/0203444

arXiv:cond-mat/0209385Physical Review LettersFeb 6, 200316 citations

Comment on the paper by S É Shnoll et al.

Evgenii A. Kushnirenko, Ivan B. Pogozhev

Physics-UspekhiFeb 28, 20003 citations