state of their wave superposition are described by $\Psi{(1,2)} = [u_k(r)u_k(r) \pm 
u_k(r)u_k(r)$)\] which basically represents a pair of particles moving with equal and opposite momenta ([**q**]{}, -[**q**]{}) with respect to their CM which moves with momentum [**K**]{} in the laboratory frame and (ii) positions ([**r**]{}$_1$, and [**r**]{}$_2$), momenta ([**k**]{}$_1$ and [**k**]{}$_2$) and energies (${\epsilon}_1$ and ${\epsilon}_2$) of two particles as separate entities lose their meaning in this state.

While superfluidity undoubtedly has a relation with the experimental observation of the rotation of a molecule embedded in a $^4He$ droplet and the non-trivial $N-$dependence of $B$ of M:$^4$He$_N$ cluster, it certainly has no relation with $p=0$ condensate because, as estblished unequivocally by one of us (Jain [@jain2]), $p=0$ condensate does not exist in the superfluid phase of a SIB. Starting with an assumption that the G-state of liquid $^4$He has non-zero values of both, $N_{p=0}$ and $N_{p\not=0}$, as concluded by CMT, Jain [@jain2] finds that: (i) such an $N(p)$ does not represent a state of minimum possible energy as expected for the G-state of every physical system, (ii) all particles in the true G-state of a SIB have identically equal enegy ($\varepsilon_o = h^2/8md^2$ with $h$ being the Planck constant, 