Referee comment updates.

1 files changed, 11 insertions, 39 deletions

diff --git a/referee_comments.txt b/referee_comments.txt
index 6bf1273..21b6552 100644
--- a/referee_comments.txt
+++ b/referee_comments.txt
@@ -1,36 +1,3 @@
-> Re: BN13654
->     Elastic properties of hidden order in URu 2Si 2 are reproduced by a
->     staggered nematic
->     by Jaron Kent-Dobias, Michael Matty, and B. J. Ramshaw
-> 
-> Dear Jaron Kent-Dobias,
-> 
-> The above manuscript has been reviewed by two of our referees.
-> Comments from the reports appear below.
-> 
-> These comments suggest that the present manuscript is not suitable for
-> publication in the Physical Review.
-> 
-> Yours sincerely,
-> 
-> Sarma Kancharla
-> Associate Editor
-> Physical Review B
-> Email: prb@aps.org
-> https://journals.aps.org/prb/
-> 
-> NEWS FROM THE PHYSICAL REVIEW JOURNALS
-> 
-> Announcing a new Physical Review journal: PRX Quantum
-> https://go.aps.org/2Q0uVwP
-> 
-> Celebrating 50 years of Physical Review A, B, C, and D
-> https://go.aps.org/2IDjVBM
-> 
-> APS is offering promotional open access fee discounts on most
-> journals in 2020
-> https://go.aps.org/3388lYG
-> 
 > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
 > Report of the First Referee -- BN13654/Kent-Dobias
 > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
@@ -50,9 +17,11 @@
 > look plausible as the disagreement does not appear to develop slowly 
 > as T decreases, but appears immediately below TN, where eta is small. 
 
-The disagreement between the theory at low temperature is resolved by the
-addition of an additional interaction in the mean-field free energy of the form
-ε²η², now shown in Fig. 2 as a thin black line.
+The disagreement between the theory at low temperature is largely resolved by
+the addition of an additional interaction in the mean-field free energy of the
+form ε²η². In a new appendix, we have worked through the mean field modulus
+implied with this new interaction and a fit is now shown in Fig. 2 as a thin
+black line.
 
 > Is it not clear how discriminatory is the agreement above TN in 2a, 2b 
 > and 2c. Are calculation results robust over a wide range of fitting 
@@ -133,10 +102,13 @@ phase, since their contribution to the response function is zero above T_c.
 > The authors do not provide any resolution on that point which is the 
 > most relevant in this problem.
 
-The articles below provide experimental evidence for the formation of
-superlattice structure along the c-axis at ambient pressure.
+The articles below, also cited in our work, all provide experimental evidence
+for the formation of superlattice structure along the c-axis at ambient
+pressure.
 
-[I pulled these from our citation on the estimate for q_*. Do they actually provide the evidence we need?]
+[I pulled these from our citation on the estimate for q_*. Do they actually
+provide the evidence we need? Can someone who knows more about these techniques
+elaborate?]
 
 https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.127002
 https://journals.aps.org/prb/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevB.43.12809