In manuscript arXiv:1703.08719 [cond-mat.soft], it was claimed that the well-known deduction of Tolman's law is not rigorous, since Tolman's argument implies that two different definitions of the surface tension, called $\gamma$ and $\bar\gamma$ in the manuscript, coincide. This claim is retracted as it can be shown by free-energy minimization that $\gamma = \bar\gamma$ indeed holds for the Laplace radius. Joachim Gro\ss, Philipp Rehner, Carlos Vega, \O{ }ivind Wilhelmsen, and the anonymous reviewers of The Journal of Chemical Physics contributed to finding the mistake in the manuscript.
Categories: cond-mat.soft cond-mat.mes-hall physics.ao-ph physics.atm-clus physics.chem-ph