Reply to the Comment of den Hartog and van Wees on "Conductance Fluctuations in Mesoscopic Normal-Metal/Superconductor Samples"

TL;DR

This paper defends previous experimental analysis of conductance fluctuations in mesoscopic Nb/Au samples against criticisms, clarifying that quantum phase incoherence was properly considered and that uncertainties do not alter the main conclusions.

Contribution

It provides a detailed rebuttal to criticisms regarding phase coherence considerations in mesoscopic conductance fluctuation experiments.

Findings

Criticism about phase incoherence is unjustified.

Uncertainties in coherence length determination do not affect main results.

The original analysis remains valid despite objections.

Abstract

In their comment cond-mat/9710285 [Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 5024 (1998)] den Hartog and van Wees (HW) raise objections against our analysis of the experimental data presented in cond-mat/9708162 [Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 1547 (1997)]. According to HW, we did not account for the quantum phase incoherence introduced by the Niobium compounds of the investigated Nb/Au hybrid samples. Here we show that and why this criticism is not justified. Some difficulties associated with a precise determination of the coherence lengths are discussed. It is discussed why these uncertainties do not have a qualitative impact on the results reported in our paper.