摘要
This comment corrects the small errors in the Letter of Baysal and Yilmaz [Chin. Phys. Lett. 24 （2007） 2185], where the case of n = 1 was ignored. Meanwhile, the discussion in this comment on the case of n = -3 is novel, which shows a potential reason why today the effect of the extra dimension has not been observed.
This comment corrects the small errors in the Letter of Baysal and Yilmaz [Chin. Phys. Lett. 24 （2007） 2185], where the case of n = 1 was ignored. Meanwhile, the discussion in this comment on the case of n = -3 is novel, which shows a potential reason why today the effect of the extra dimension has not been observed.
