Response: Comment on "Energy Transfer and Dual Cascade in Kinetic Magnetized Plasma Turbulence"

TL;DR

This paper defends the original findings on spectral transfer in magnetized plasma turbulence, clarifying misunderstandings and providing numerical evidence to support their argument against a recent comment.

Contribution

The authors clarify and defend their original spectral transfer argument, demonstrating its consistency and supporting it with numerical evidence, countering claims of incompleteness.

Findings

Their spectral transfer argument is self-contained and consistent.

Numerical evidence supports their original claims.

The comment's technical statements are shown to be incorrect.

Abstract

We respond to the recent comment [arXiv:1105.1593] on our Letter [G. G. Plunk and T. Tatsuno, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 165003 (2011)]. The comment claims that our argument for spectral transfer direction is incomplete. The comment gives an incomplete account of our argument. We explain how the argument of our Letter, in full, is self-contained consistent and well-supported by numerical evidence. Other technical statements made in the comment are explained to be incorrect. We direct interested readers to our forthcoming article, which should clarify any remaining technical ambiguities and also illuminate deeper physical issues.