We strongly disagree with the essence of the Osherovich (hereafter Osherovich) comment on one of our papers. The following paragraphs provide the basis of our disagreement and elaborate on why we believe that none of the concluding statements in his Comment are true. Our most important point is that one can apply the model developed by Osherovich and colleagues to real data obtained at a single point in space to determine the polytropic index within magnetic clouds if and only if the highly idealized assumptions of that model conform to physical reality. There is good reason to believe that those assumptions do not provide an accurate physical description of real magnetic clouds in the spherically expanding solar wind
This response demonstrates that the comment by Peeters contains an incorrect and misleading interpre...
In this response, we address the three main comments by Tsurutani et al. (2018, http://doi.org/10.10...
The authors disagree with Dr. D. V. Pestrikov’s assertion that “the results obtained in the commente...
We respond to Dikpati et al.'s criticism of our recent solar dynamo model. A different treatment of ...
We show that the upper bound for the central magnetic field of a super-Chandrasekhar white dwarf cal...
We respond to Dikpati et al.'s (2005) criticism of our recent solar dynamo model (Chatterjee et al. ...
Abstract The paper by Popova et al. presents an oversimplified mathematical model of solar activity...
In a recent publication, viz. [Phys. Lett. A 326 (2004) 267], Jovanovic and Shukla (J. and S. in the...
International audienceIn the preceding Comment, Ramos-Álvarez, Mosqueira, and Vidal [1] criticize th...
International audienceWe reply to the “Comment on ‘Lifshitz-Matsubara sum formula for the Casimir pr...
We reply to a very recent Comment arxiv:1204.2349 by Bernhard, Friedrich, Schlueter, and Schoenning ...
International audienceWe reply to the “Comment on ‘Lifshitz-Matsubara sum formula for the Casimir pr...
In their preceding comment on our paper [Matthaeus et al., 1994] (hereinafter reffered to as paper 1...
In this communication we provide our answers to the comments by Usoskin (2017) on our recent paper (...
make the point that more than one mechanism islikely to be involved in the production of polar cap d...
This response demonstrates that the comment by Peeters contains an incorrect and misleading interpre...
In this response, we address the three main comments by Tsurutani et al. (2018, http://doi.org/10.10...
The authors disagree with Dr. D. V. Pestrikov’s assertion that “the results obtained in the commente...
We respond to Dikpati et al.'s criticism of our recent solar dynamo model. A different treatment of ...
We show that the upper bound for the central magnetic field of a super-Chandrasekhar white dwarf cal...
We respond to Dikpati et al.'s (2005) criticism of our recent solar dynamo model (Chatterjee et al. ...
Abstract The paper by Popova et al. presents an oversimplified mathematical model of solar activity...
In a recent publication, viz. [Phys. Lett. A 326 (2004) 267], Jovanovic and Shukla (J. and S. in the...
International audienceIn the preceding Comment, Ramos-Álvarez, Mosqueira, and Vidal [1] criticize th...
International audienceWe reply to the “Comment on ‘Lifshitz-Matsubara sum formula for the Casimir pr...
We reply to a very recent Comment arxiv:1204.2349 by Bernhard, Friedrich, Schlueter, and Schoenning ...
International audienceWe reply to the “Comment on ‘Lifshitz-Matsubara sum formula for the Casimir pr...
In their preceding comment on our paper [Matthaeus et al., 1994] (hereinafter reffered to as paper 1...
In this communication we provide our answers to the comments by Usoskin (2017) on our recent paper (...
make the point that more than one mechanism islikely to be involved in the production of polar cap d...
This response demonstrates that the comment by Peeters contains an incorrect and misleading interpre...
In this response, we address the three main comments by Tsurutani et al. (2018, http://doi.org/10.10...
The authors disagree with Dr. D. V. Pestrikov’s assertion that “the results obtained in the commente...