Reply to Comment on Circular Dichroism in the Angle-Resolved Photoemission Spectrum of the High-Temperature Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8 Superconductor http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.1648

TL;DR

This paper defends the original interpretation of circular dichroism in angle-resolved photoemission spectra of a high-temperature superconductor, emphasizing the need to consider structural factors before proposing exotic explanations.

Contribution

It clarifies that the previous critique's arguments are insufficient to dismiss the geometric mechanism, stressing the importance of structural analysis in spectroscopic studies of complex materials.

Findings

Arguments by Norman et al. are not sufficient to dismiss the geometric explanation.

Structural issues must be assessed before proposing exotic mechanisms.

Highlights the importance of considering structural factors in spectroscopic analysis.

Abstract

We conclude that arguments of Norman et al. in their Comment do not provide a significant basis for their claim that the geometric mechanism for explaining the observations reported by them is not viable. More generally, our study highlights the importance of assessing structural issues before invoking exotic mechanisms for explaining unusual spectroscopic observations, especially in complex materia.