Reply to the ‘Comment on “Optical conversion of conical intersection to avoided crossing”’ by D. G. Truhlar and C. A. Mead, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2011, 13, DOI: 10.1039/c0cp01358g

Abstract

The preceding comment by D. G. Truhlar and C. A. Mead, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2011, 13, DOI: 10.1039/c0cp01358g sheds light on our previous paper (Y. Arasaki and K. Takatsuka, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2010, 12, 1239) in a valuable way which we mostly agree, but also makes criticism on a point contrary to what we intended to convey. They see our description of the optical conversion of conical intersection (CI) to an avoided crossing (AX) to be from a limited perspective, and in particular find short of the truth in our statements that the CI is converted to an AX by an external perturbation. In this reply we wish to clarify our position on this point by supporting the heart of their comment. What we actually saw in our previous paper was the phenomenon of the CI being shifted in position by an external perturbation, from our own view point and with numerical calculations.