Reply to "Comment on London theory for superconducting phase transitions in external magnetic fields: Application to UPt_3"

TL;DR

This paper provides a detailed response to critiques of the authors' previous work on London theory for superconducting phase transitions in magnetic fields, specifically addressing issues raised regarding UPt_3.

Contribution

It clarifies and defends the original London theory application to UPt_3, addressing specific criticisms and refining the theoretical framework.

Findings

Reaffirms the validity of the original London theory in this context

Addresses and resolves specific points raised in the comment

Provides clarifications to previous theoretical assumptions

Abstract

A reply to a comment by Mineev and Champel.