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:quant-ph/0206149 · Physics Letters A

Reply to “Comments on Bouda and Djama's ‘Quantum Newton's Law’”

A. Bouda, T. Djama

Published Apr 1, 2002• 12 citations
arXivHTMLPDF
DOI
10.1016/s0375-9601(02)00277-3

Related papers

Comments on Bouda and Djama's “Quantum Newton's law”

Edward R. Floyd

arXiv:quant-ph/0206114•Physics Letters A•Apr 1, 2002•11 citations

Reply to “Comment to ‘The laws of physics do not prohibit counterfactual communication’ ”

Salih H, Hance JR, McCutcheon W +1 more

•Jan 1, 2025•0 citations

Reply to "Comment to 'The laws of physics do not prohibit counterfactual communication'"

H Salih, Jonte R. Hance, W McCutcheon +1 more

•Jun 10, 2025•0 citations

Reply to Comment on "Quantum Force in a Superconductor"

А. В. Никулов

A reply is made to Comment by D.P.Sheehan in which he takes notice that the quantum force introduced in my earlier paper A.V.Nikulov, Phys. Rev. B 64, 012505 (2001) challenges to the absolute status of the second law of thermodynamics. It is shown that the introduction of the quantum force explains only an experimental challenge to the second law. The observation of the persistent current at non-zero resistance R > 0 is experimental evidence of violation of the postulate saving the second law in the beginning of the 20 century. According to this postulate any Brownian motion is absolutely random whereas the persistent current at R > 0 is a regulated Brownian motion.

arXiv:cond-mat/0304313•Apr 14, 2003•1 citation

Quantum Newton's law

A. Bouda, T. Djama

arXiv:quant-ph/0103071•Physics Letters A•Jun 1, 2001•23 citations

Reply to “Comment on ‘Relevance of Bell’s theorem as a signature of nonlocality: Case of classical angular momentum distributions’ ”

A. Matzkin

In this Reply, we show that the main argument of the criticism given in the preceding Comment is inconsistent with the assumption lying at the basis of the model introduced in the original paper [A. Matzkin, Phys. Rev. A 77, 062110 (2008)]. We further clarify some issues concerning the interplay between noncommuting measurements and conservation laws in order to reply to the additional criticism contained in the comment.

Physical Review A•Apr 10, 2009•0 citations
A reply is made to Comment by D.P.Sheehan in which he takes notice that the quantum force introduced in my earlier paper A.V.Nikulov, Phys. Rev. B 64, 012505 (2001) challenges to the absolute status of the second law of thermodynamics. It is shown that the introduction of the quantum force explains only an experimental challenge to the second law. The observation of the persistent current at non-zero resistance R > 0 is experimental evidence of violation of the postulate saving the second law in the beginning of the 20 century. According to this postulate any Brownian motion is absolutely random whereas the persistent current at R > 0 is a regulated Brownian motion.