Pnath/referee reply

[maxitg]

Following our discussion I have added more text to the reply to the
referee report. All of my text is in red.

Tomorrow I will work more on the paper and send you a revised version
that takes into account all the points discussed so far in the reply.

---

I am attaching the latest version of reply to the referee and the revised version
of the paper with changes made in the paper to explain more clearly some of the
points raised by the referee. My replies as well as the changes and additions
I have made in the revised version of the paper are in red.

You can now add your parts as we discussed on a time scale convenient to
you. After that we can discuss further on skype when you are ready before
finalizing our reply and the revised version before resubmission.

---

I wanted to mention two items in referee report:

1. In item 2.1 the referee says that we should check that real directions are heavier than the Hubble rate.
   The real directions are the VEVs which give the decay constant f=f_1=f_2. Now from Friedman equation
   we have H^2= (8\pi/3 M_P^2) V(\phi). So we can calculate H from this equation during inflation and take
   the ratio with f and show that H/f<<1. Should that be sufficient to satisfy the referee.

2. Regarding item 4, where the referee defines a(N) = a(end) e^{-N}, it appears that this is the way the book
   of Liddle and Lyth define N. I got this reference from the attached lecture note. In this note N in Eq. 43
   is defined the way referee says it should be defined.

I was thinking that alternately we can say that inflation ends when $\epsilon&lt;&lt;1$ breaks down, i.e.,
\epsilon approaches ~1. I think the referee would agree to that.

I will be at school tomorrow, so if you wish to skype that is fine. On the other hand if you would rather
spend time on working on the items already discussed related to the referee report, that is fine
as well.

---

This change is