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/0612099

Reply to comment by S.-K. Yip cond-mat/0611426

Ryan Barnett, Ari M. Turner, Eugene Demler

Published Dec 4, 2006• 1 citation
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

We respond to S.-K. Yip's criticism of our work on the classification of spinor condensates. We explain why his criticism is unfounded, emphasizing that the phases he mentions have been addressed in our paper cond-mat/0611230. To provide a constructive aspect to this response, we use it as an opportunity to show how our classification scheme makes explicit not only spin rotations which leave spinor states invariant, but also the phase factors which need to accompany them.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.cond-mat/0612099

Related papers

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

Reply to "Common on `Superfluidity in the interior-gap states'"

Shin-Tza Wu, Sungkit Yip

We show that the recent Comment by Liu and Wilczek (cond-mat/0304632) on our work (PRA 67, 053603) is incorrect.

arXiv:cond-mat/0305675•May 29, 2003•0 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

Comment on “Triviality of the Ground State Structure in Ising Spin Glasses”

Enzo Marinari, Giorgio Parisi A

We show that the evidence of cond-mat/9906323 does not discriminate among droplet model and mean field like behavior.

arXiv:cond-mat/0002457•Physical Review Letters•Oct 9, 2000•10 citations

Comment on "Classifying Novel Phases of Spinor Atoms"

Sungkit Yip

Comment on "Classifying Novel Phases of Spinor Atoms", Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 180412 (2006) by R. Barnett, A. Turner and E. Demler

arXiv:cond-mat/0611426•Nov 16, 2006•1 citation

Stace and Barrett Reply:

Thomas M. Stace, S. D. Barrett

We reply to a comment by Averin and Korotkov http://uk.arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0404549 on Stace and Barrett, PRL 92, 136802 (2004) http://link.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v92/e136802, showing that their specific criticisms are unfounded, and clarifying some of our results.

arXiv:cond-mat/0406751•Physical Review Letters•Feb 16, 2005•7 citations
We respond to S.-K. Yip's criticism of our work on the classification of spinor condensates. We explain why his criticism is unfounded, emphasizing that the phases he mentions have been addressed in our paper cond-mat/0611230. To provide a constructive aspect to this response, we use it as an opportunity to show how our classification scheme makes explicit not only spin rotations which leave spinor states invariant, but also the phase factors which need to accompany them.