Addendum to “Polymorphic phase transition and thermal stability in squaric acid (H2C4O4)” by K.-S. Lee et al. [J. Phys. Chem. Solids 73 (2012) 890]

While a paper mentioned above being published on line, we have become aware of the high-pressure neutron diffraction study of squaric acid (H₂C₄O₄) by C.L. Bull et al. They developed that neutron diffraction experiments could be performed under quasi-hydrostatic conditions to pressures of up to 18 GPa and showed that the tetragonal phase of H₂C₄O₄ was still observed at 14.5 GPa (above the critical pressure of P_c=0.75 GPa at room temperature) beyond the previous pressure limits of 7 GPa. Taking the high-pressure neutron diffraction results into consideration, modified temperature-pressure phase diagram in the paper stated above is reported.     

Comment on “Structural,dielectric, optical and ferroelectric property of urea succinic acid crystals grown in aqueous solution containing maleic acid” by B.K. Singh et al. [J. Phys. Chem. Solids 71 (2010) 1774]

The volume of elementary cell of the urea succinic acid (M–USA) growing from a solution containing 1 mol% maleic acid is 69% greater than that of urea succinic acid (USA) grown in the usual conditions. M–USA crystallises in the monoclinic system with a centre of symmetry, which excludes the piezoelectric and ferroelectric properties. The results presented in the paper commented on are artefacts.     

A response to Murshed et al., J Nanopart Res (2010) 12:2007–2010

This brief communication provides a response to Murshed et al. (J Nanopart Res 12:2007–2010, 2010). We acknowledge that three of the equations in our original article (Doroodchi et al. J Nanopart Res 11:1501–1507, 2009) contained minor typographical errors. However, we confirm that these misprinted equations have no bearing on the results presented within that article. In addition, we would like to clarify that we do not challenge the methodology of Leong et al. (J Nanopart Res 8:245–254, 2006). Instead, we repeated their analysis using a more general form for the temperature field with continuity imposed across the particle–nanolayer–liquid interfaces and found that the solution reduces to the Renovated-Maxwell model.     

Addendum to: “Ricci-flat holonomy: A classification” [J. Geom. Phys. 57 (6) 1457–1475]: The case of spin(10)

This note fills a hole in the author’s previous paper “Ricci-flat holonomy: A classification”, by dealing with irreducible holonomy algebras that are subalgebras or real forms of C⊕spin(10,C)$\mathbb{C}\oplus \mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{p}\mathfrak{i}\mathfrak{n}(10,\mathbb{C})$. These all turn out to be of Ricci type.     

Addendum to: “Geometrical and topological aspects of electrostatics on Riemannian manifolds” [J. Geom. Phys. 57 (8) (2007) 1679–1696]

In this note we discuss and solve several open problems posed in our recent paper “Geometrical and topological aspects of electrostatics on Riemannian manifolds”, also published in this journal. Some minor mistakes therein are corrected as well.     

Comment on “Relativistic atomic data for W XLVII” by S. Aggarwal et al. [Chin. Phys. B 24(2015)053201]

Recently, S. Aggarwal et al. [Chin. Phys. B 24(2015) 053201] reported energy levels, radiative rates, and lifetimes for the lowest 148 levels belonging to the 3s23 p, 3s3p2, 3s23 d, 3s3p3 d, 3p3, 3p23 d, 3s3d2, 3p3d2, and 3d3 configurations of Al-like tungsten. While their calculated energies for the levels and the radiative rates for transitions are correct, the reported results for lifetimes are completely wrong. According to our calculations, errors in their reported lifetimes are up to 14 orders of magnitude for over 90% of the levels. Here we report the correct lifetimes and explain the reasons for discrepancies.     

Erratum to “Unique continuation results for Ricci curvature and applications” [J. Geom. Phys. 58 (2008) 179–207]

Corrections are given to some of the proofs of the paper mentioned in the title.