Abstract

It is shown that, even using the mathematical treatment proposed by the comment [Opt. Lett. 35, 265 (2010) ], the results of our paper will be revised only in quantity. The qualitative features, i.e., negative Im[σ] (imaginary conductivity) of AlInN, are unchanged. Otherwise, the method used by Schneider, which produces positive Im[σ] based only on |Efilm(ω)Eref(ω)| value, is proved to be incorrect.

© 2010 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |
  • |

  1. A. Schneider, Opt. Lett. 35, xxxx (2010).
    [CrossRef]
  2. T. T. Kang, M. Yamamoto, M. Tanaka, A. Hashimoto, A. Yamamoto, R. Sudo, A. Noda, D. W. Liu, and K. Yamamoto, Opt. Lett. 34, 2507 (2009).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]

2010 (1)

A. Schneider, Opt. Lett. 35, xxxx (2010).
[CrossRef]

2009 (1)

Hashimoto, A.

Kang, T. T.

Liu, D. W.

Noda, A.

Schneider, A.

A. Schneider, Opt. Lett. 35, xxxx (2010).
[CrossRef]

Sudo, R.

Tanaka, M.

Yamamoto, A.

Yamamoto, K.

Yamamoto, M.

Cited By

OSA participates in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from OSA journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (1)

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Real and imaginary parts of (a) the refractive index and (b) the conductivity of the AlInN film calculated by Eq. (1) proposed by Schneider.

Equations (1)

Equations on this page are rendered with MathJax. Learn more.

E film ( ω ) E ref ( ω ) = 1 + i ( n 2 + i k 2 n 1 ) ω d c 1 i ( n 2 + i k 2 n 1 ) ( n 2 + i k 2 n 3 ) ( n 1 + n 3 ) ω d c .

Metrics