Reply to Comment on ``Time-dependent quasi-Hermitian Hamiltonians and the unitary quantum evolution''

Abstract

In his fresh "Comment" (arXiv:0711.0137v1), A. Mostafazadeh reacts on my very recent letter (arXiv:0710.5653v1) where I tried to clarify certain misunderstandings which occurred in A. M., Phys. Lett. B \textbf{650}, 208 (2007) [arXiv:0706.1872v2, "Paper"]. As long as the "Comment" offers a new support of the original assertions made in the "Paper", I feel obliged to re-clarify the matter by extending my argumentation. I insist that it is possible to escape the main conclusion of the "Paper", indeed. In particular, I point out a gap in the new calculations in "Comment", add a few remarks on the notation and reconfirm that the unitarity of the time-evolution DOES NOT require the time-independence of the metric operator.

arXiv comment4 pages, reply to preprint arXiv:0711.0137v1 [quant-ph]

References in corpus (3)

• Time-Dependent Pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonians Defining a Unitary Quantum System and Uniqueness of the Metric Operator
• Time-dependent quasi-Hermitian Hamiltonians and the unitarity of quantum evolution
• Comment on ``Time-dependent quasi-Hermitian Hamiltonians and the unitary quantum evolution''

Cited by in corpus (5)

• Unitary quantum evolution for time-dependent quasi-Hermitian systems with non-observable Hamiltonians
• On the invariant method for the time-dependent non-Hermitian Hamiltonians
• Non-Hermitian coupled cluster method for non-stationary systems and its interaction-picture reinterpretation
• Comment on "Reply to Comment on Time-dependent Quasi-Hermitian Hamiltonians and the Unitary Quantum Evolution"
• Some Remarks on Quantum Brachistochrone