Comment on “B_y fluctuations in the magnetosheath and azimuthal flow velocity transients in the dayside ionosphere” by Newell and Sibeck

Newell and Sibeck [1993] (hereafter N&S) list some objections to our interpretation of dayside auroral transients and associated azimuthal flow bursts in terms of pulsed reconnection [e.g. Lockwood et al., 1989; 1993a]. They present what they term an “apparently overlooked” alternative explanation in terms of steady reconnection and fluctuations in the magnitude of the By component of the magnetosheath field. The objections of N&S can all be answered by reference to our previous publications and their alternative explanation was only “overlooked” in so far as it fails to explain the observations. Here we discuss just some of the reasons why the objections of N&S are invalid, and then give reasons why the events are not simply due to magnetosheath |By| changes.

COMMENT ON THE TAU DECAY PUZZLE

We analyse the current data on tau-lepton decays and show that they are consistent with the standard model.

Reply to Comment on ``Towards a large deviation theory for strongly correlated systems''

The computational study commented by Touchette opens the door to a desirable generalization of standard large deviation theory for special, though ubiquitous, correlations. We focus on three interrelated aspects: (i) numerical results strongly suggest that the standard exponential probability law is asymptotically replaced by a power-law dominant term; (ii) a subdominant term appears to reinforce the thermodynamically extensive entropic nature of q-generalized rate function; (iii) the correlations we discussed, correspond to Q -Gaussian distributions, differing from Lévy?s, except in the case of Cauchy?Lorentz distributions. Touchette has agreeably discussed point (i), but, unfortunately, points (ii) and (iii) escaped to his analysis. Claiming the absence of connection with q-exponentials is unjustified.

Comment: Is memristor a dynamic element?

The authors present a charge/flux formulation of the equations of memristive circuits, which seemingly show that the memristor should not be considered as a dynamic circuit element. Here, is shown that this approach implicitly reduces the dynamic analysis to a certain subset of the state space in such a way that the dynamic contribution of memristors is hidden. This reduction might entail a substantial loss of information, regarding e.g. the local stability properties of the circuit. Two examples illustrate this. It is concluded that the memristor, even with its unconventional features, must be considered as a dynamic element.

Comment on Rule 14a-8(i)(9), Securities and Exchange Commission, June 30, 2015

The Securities and Exchange Commission has been analyzing its interpretation under Subsection (i)(9) of Rule 14a-8. This provision allows for the exclusion of shareholder proposals that conflict with those submitted by management. The staff has been examining its interpretation since instructed to do so by the chair of the SEC following a no action appeal in a case involving Whole Foods. A number of letters and memos submitted in connection with the review have analyzed the issue. At least one asserted that any change in interpretation required the Commission to go through the process of notice and comment. This letter asserts that notice and comment is not required, relying extensively on Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association.

Comment On 'practical Advice For Avoidance Of Pain Associated With Insertion Of Intrauterine Contraceptives': Authors' Response.

40