Reply to ‘‘Comment on ‘Gravity as a zero-point-fluctuation force’ ’’

Although mathematically self-consistent, Carlip’s approach to the reanalysis of Sakharov gravity is flawed by the neglect of important physical constraints associated with the interaction, and leads to an incorrect 1/${\mathit{R}}^4$ spatial dependence for the force. When appropriate physical cutoffs are incorporated into the modeling, however, inverse-square-law Newtonian gravity emerges as originally derived.