Abstract
The preceding comment by Mazin et al. on our work makes two claims: (1) the calculated variations of the superconducting energy gap within the σ or the π bands are not observable in real samples due to scatterings, and (2) the Coulomb repulsion μ(k, k’) is negligibly small between σ and π states and thus should be approximated by a diagonal 2 × matrix in the σ and π channels. Here, we point out that the former does not affect the validity of our theoretical work, which is for the clean limit, and that the latter is based on an oversimplified estimation of μ.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics |
| Volume | 69 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2004 Feb 6 |
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Electronic, Optical and Magnetic Materials
- Condensed Matter Physics
Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Reply to “Comment on ‘First-principles calculation of the superconducting transition in MgB<sub>2</sub> within the anisotropic Eliashberg formalism’”'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.
Cite this
Choi, H. J., Roundy, D., Sun, H., Cohen, M. L., & Louie, S. G. (2004). Reply to “Comment on ‘First-principles calculation of the superconducting transition in MgB2 within the anisotropic Eliashberg formalism’”. Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics, 69(5). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.69.056502