Reply to “ A remark on the “ Theory of neutrino oscillations ” ”

I refute the criticisms of Ref. [1] raised in Ref. [2]. With this short note I would like to answer the rather provocative note of Okun, Rotaev, Schepkin and Tsukerman (O.R.S.T.) in Ref. [2]. First, I would like to thank O.R.S.T. for their attention to my recent paper in Ref. [1], that is the object of their criticism. The specific target of the O.R.S.T. criticism is the use of the substitution t = x in the covariant derivation of the neutrino oscillation probability in the plane wave approach. Here x is the distance traveled by the neutrino between production and detection and t is the elapsed time. Unfortunately, O.R.S.T. did not notice or mention that in Ref. [1] it is explained that in order to justify the substitution t = x it is necessary to treat massive neutrinos as wave packets [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16]. I think that, if one accepts the assumption t = x, the covariant derivation of the neutrino oscillation probability in the plane wave approach presented in Ref. [1] does not present inconsistencies. The physical reason why the substitution t = x is correct can be understood by noting that the massive neutrino wave packets overlap with the detection process for an interval of time [t−∆t , t+∆t], with