Comment on "First-Order Superconducting Phase Transition in CeCoIn5"

TL;DR

This paper refutes a previous comment by demonstrating that the Pauli limit estimate for CeCoIn5 was oversimplified, leading to the conclusion that the original critique was invalid and the comment is withdrawn.

Contribution

It clarifies the importance of effects neglected in the original Pauli limit estimate for CeCoIn5, invalidating the previous comment.

Findings

Neglect of important effects leads to an underestimation of the Pauli limit.

The original comment's argument is rendered moot due to these effects.

The comment has been withdrawn based on this correction.

Abstract

The Clogston estimate for the Pauli limit used in the original comment (and the paper to which it referred) neglects important effects that lead to a significant enhancement of the Pauli limit in CeCoIn5. The discussion in the original comment is therefore moot and the comment has been withdrawn.