Reply to Comment Submitted by Murnick et al. on "Intracavity OptoGalvanic Spectroscopy Not Suitable for Ambient Level Radiocarbon Detection"

Dipayan Paul; Harro A. J. Meijer

doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.6b00473

Reply to Comment Submitted by Murnick et al. on "Intracavity OptoGalvanic Spectroscopy Not Suitable for Ambient Level Radiocarbon Detection"

Dipayan Paul, Harro A. J. Meijer^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Isotope Research

Research output: Contribution to journal › Editorial › Academic › peer-review

51 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Recently Murnick et al. commented on our article "Intracavity OptoGalvanic Spectroscopy is not suitable for ambient level radiocarbon detection", stating that the methodology and conclusions we derived were incorrect. We completely disagree with the comments submitted by Murnick et al. and a detailed response to their comments is included here.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	4574-4577
Number of pages	4
Journal	Analytical Chemistry
Volume	88
Issue number	8
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b00473
Publication status	Published - 19-Apr-2016

Access to Document

10.1021/acs.analchem.6b00473

Reply to Comment Submitted by Murnick et al. on “Intracavity OptoGalvanic Spectroscopy Not Suitable for Ambient Level Radiocarbon Detection”Final publisher's version, 891 KBLicence: Taverne

Handle.net

Persistent link

Cite this

@article{145d4074e02b4b498c9b953eda52db11,

title = "Reply to Comment Submitted by Murnick et al. on {"}Intracavity OptoGalvanic Spectroscopy Not Suitable for Ambient Level Radiocarbon Detection{"}",

abstract = "Recently Murnick et al. commented on our article {"}Intracavity OptoGalvanic Spectroscopy is not suitable for ambient level radiocarbon detection{"}, stating that the methodology and conclusions we derived were incorrect. We completely disagree with the comments submitted by Murnick et al. and a detailed response to their comments is included here.",

author = "Dipayan Paul and Meijer, {Harro A. J.}",

year = "2016",

month = apr,

day = "19",

doi = "10.1021/acs.analchem.6b00473",

language = "English",

volume = "88",

pages = "4574--4577",

journal = "Analytical Chemistry",

issn = "0003-2700",

publisher = "AMER CHEMICAL SOC INC",

number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reply to Comment Submitted by Murnick et al. on "Intracavity OptoGalvanic Spectroscopy Not Suitable for Ambient Level Radiocarbon Detection"

AU - Paul, Dipayan

AU - Meijer, Harro A. J.

PY - 2016/4/19

Y1 - 2016/4/19

N2 - Recently Murnick et al. commented on our article "Intracavity OptoGalvanic Spectroscopy is not suitable for ambient level radiocarbon detection", stating that the methodology and conclusions we derived were incorrect. We completely disagree with the comments submitted by Murnick et al. and a detailed response to their comments is included here.

AB - Recently Murnick et al. commented on our article "Intracavity OptoGalvanic Spectroscopy is not suitable for ambient level radiocarbon detection", stating that the methodology and conclusions we derived were incorrect. We completely disagree with the comments submitted by Murnick et al. and a detailed response to their comments is included here.

U2 - 10.1021/acs.analchem.6b00473

DO - 10.1021/acs.analchem.6b00473

M3 - Editorial

C2 - 27014803

SN - 0003-2700

VL - 88

SP - 4574

EP - 4577

JO - Analytical Chemistry

JF - Analytical Chemistry

IS - 8

ER -

Reply to Comment Submitted by Murnick et al. on "Intracavity OptoGalvanic Spectroscopy Not Suitable for Ambient Level Radiocarbon Detection"

Abstract

Access to Document

Handle.net

Fingerprint

Cite this