Abstract
It is shown, by means of simple, soluble examples, that the argument of van Ek and Lodder’s preceding Comment is erroneous, as are their conclusions.Received 27 January 1989DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.40.1981©1989 American Physical Society
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
