Reply to "comment on 'New physics constraints from atomic parity violation in Cs 133 '"

Abstract

In B. K. Sahoo, B. P. Das, and H. Spiesberger, Phys. Rev. D 103, L111303 (2021)PRVDAQ2470-001010.1103/PhysRevD.103.L111303, we had reported an improved calculation of the nuclear spin-independent parity violating electric dipole transition amplitude (E1PV) for the 6sS21/2-7sS21/2 transition in Cs133 by employing a relativistic coupled-cluster theory. In a recent Comment, Roberts and Ginges have raised questions about our calculation of the so-called Core contribution to E1PV. Our result for this contribution does not agree with theirs, but is in agreement with results from previous calculations where this contribution is given explicitly. In our Reply, we explain in detail the validity of the evaluation of our core contribution. We emphasize that the Main, Core and Tail contributions have been treated on an equal footing in our work unlike the sum-over-states calculations. We also address their concerns about our approximate treatment of the contributions from the QED corrections, which was not the aim of our work, but was carried out for completeness. Nonetheless, conclusion of our above-mentioned paper is not going to affect if we replace our estimated QED contribution to E1PV by earlier estimation.