Abstract
We refute the criticism expressed in a Comment by Krstulovic, L'vov, and Nazarenko [Phys. Rev. E 105, 027101 (2022)10.1103/PhysRevE.105.027101] on our paper [Phys. Rev. E 103, 023106 (2021)2470-004510.1103/PhysRevE.103.023106]. We first show that quantization of circulation is not ignored in our analysis. Then, we propose a more sophisticated analysis to avoid a subtle problem with the regularity of the velocity field. We thus defend the main results of our paper, which predicts the double-cascade scenario where the quantum stress cascade follows the Richardson cascade. We also provide a conjecture on the relation between the Kelvin-wave cascade and the quantum stress cascade.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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.
