deletions | additions       diff --git a/Payam and DNA.tex b/Payam and DNA.tex  index 187ad18..deb39a4 100644  --- a/Payam and DNA.tex  +++ b/Payam and DNA.tex 
...
\item Payam has (equation 12) $v_{\rm DNA}=F_{\rm ext} \ln(\ell/d)/\eta\ell - \lambda E\ln(1+r_{\rm D}/d)/\eta$, which we use to calculate $t_{\rm D}$. He finds $t_{\rm D}\sim \ell\eta/E\lambda$ -- whence this simplification?  \end{enumerate}  %%-------------------------------------------------  \item {\it Is the elongated jet derivation valid?} (Since integration along length of the DNA may break L\&L's ``weak momentum injection'' assumption.)\\  Yes it {\bf is }valid -- this is explicitly actually  addressed on pp. 2-3: the criterion for the submerged jet formulaeto be valid  is the same as the L\&L  criterion for linear fluid velocity dependence. \item Is there anything to be done about the discrepancy between experiment and observations in the DNA capture paper?   \begin{itemize}   \item The onset of the diffusion-limited regime occurs {\it later} than predicted when varying the DNA length (figure 4a). But when varying the potential difference, the crossover happens earlier.   \item The approximations and order-of-magnitude guesses in the paper mean that we have no reason to expect high-fidelity predictions. They actually do surprisingly well.   \item But there might be a question of internal consistency.   \item I could improve the work by putting error bars on the predictions -- perhaps this will boost faith in the results, or point to some hitherto unaccounted-for issue.   \end{itemize}  \item Is there anything to learn from the inevitable energy dissipation -- from the electric field to the viscous fluid. How much work is done?