Talk:Fluctuations

It seems to me that the phrase below

If the possible values of each \sigma are finitely many (and at least two) their sum can be as large as the number N

should be complemented by some hypotesis on the values of \sigma otherwise if the possible values of \sigma are {1/1000,-1/1000} and N=100 seems to be a counterexample to the statement.I bet you're thinking \sigma\in {-1,1}.

Author reply

Thank you: I have changed the statement

Reviewer B:

This is an excellent and concisely written article. I have just few minor comments and suggestions.

1. Please use the word “capacitor” in “Schottky fluctuations” and in “Johnson-Nyquist noise" chapters.

2. Use “resistor” instead of “resistivity” in “Johnson-Nyquist noise” chapter.

3. In chapter “Fluctuation-Dissipation therem”, I suggest to use “entropy production rate” instead of “entropy creation rate”.

4. Perhaps it is useful to use different notations for time and ensemble averages throughout the article.

5. It would be useful to include a short paragraph discussing validity of FDT and to provide references to recent development on fluctuation theorems in nonequilibrium systems. This suggestion is indeed optional.

Author Reply

1+2) ok: however resistor is an element of a circuit which shows resistance. Therefore I have used resistor instead of resistivity when in the first sense and resistance when referring to the ohmic value of the resistor; likewise inductance and capacitance have been used in the same sense. The words resistivity and capacity have been accordingly replaced. This is likely to be what the referee means. I added a comment

3) ok: changed

4) ok: I did that

5) The words "fluctuation theorem" appear with different colors: hence they are clickable. Clicking on them sends the reader to the item "Fluctuation theorem" where the subject is discussed in detail. About the validity of FT I added a comment at the end of the section.

Thank you