English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

We deconstruct and address a comment to Carroll et al. [Phys Rev Lett 126,063902 (2021)] (PRL) that has been posted on arXiv appearing as two versions[arXiv:2106.15242v1] and [arXiv:2106.15242v2]. This comment claimed that a termin the model presented in the PRL had been incorrectly omitted and that, hence,the laser threshold predicted by the model in the PRL is unattainable. We showthat the term in question was correctly neglected because it representscollective effects that are not observable in the devices modelled in the PRL.Moreover, even if this term were to be included, the laser threshold wouldstill be present, contrary to what was claimed in the comment. We conclude thatthe model presented in PRL is correct and that its results are innovative andof wide application in laser physics and quantum optics.

Reply to the Comment on "Thermal, quantum antibunching and lasing thresholds from single emitters to macroscopic devices"