Reply to ``Comment on `Tunnel Window's Imprint on Dipolar Field Distributions' ''

TL;DR

This paper responds to a comment disputing the original authors' explanation of short-time relaxation in dipolar systems, defending their interpretation against claims of oversimplification.

Contribution

The authors clarify and defend their original model of short-time relaxation, emphasizing that it is not merely a uniform noise field within an energy window.

Findings

Rebuttal of the comment's claim about the noise field model

Clarification of the original interpretation of relaxation mechanisms

Reaffirmation of the validity of their original approach

Abstract

Stamp and Tupitsyn (ST) have recently posted a Comment (P.C.E. Stamp and I.S. Tupitsyn, arXiv:cond-mat/0211413) on a Letter of ours (J.J. Alonso and J.F. Fernandez, Phys. Rev. Lett. v87, 097205 (2001)). They claim that, in our Letter, ``Short-time relaxation was caused by a simple noise field, acting uniformly over an `energy window' of width 2*delta h_{hf} (to simulate the fluctuating nuclear spin bias)''. We see no basis for this statement.