# Reply to "Comment on `Past of a quantum particle revisited' "

## TL;DR

This paper defends previous findings on the quantum particle's past, refutes objections, and highlights a retrocausation issue in Vaidman's definition, emphasizing ongoing debates in quantum interpretation.

## Contribution

It provides a rebuttal to critiques of earlier work and introduces a retrocausation problem in defining a quantum particle's past.

## Key findings

- Refutes invalid objections by Peleg and Vaidman
- Identifies a retrocausation problem in Vaidman's definition
- Reaffirms previous quantum particle past findings

## Abstract

We stand by our findings in Phys. Rev A. 96, 022126 (2017). In addition to refuting the invalid objections raised by Peleg and Vaidman, we report a retrocausation problem inherent in Vaidman's definition of the past of a quantum particle.