Abstract

Recently, Xiao et al. [Opt. Lett. 39, 574 (2014) [CrossRef]  ] compared two sets of boundary conditions and the resulting transformation coefficients for an electromagnetic wave at a temporal boundary. They claimed to identify a correct set and to resolve the existing discrepancy in the literature. We point out that the boundary conditions discarded by Xiao et al. as incorrect have been used in the literature for rapidly growing plasma, for which the material model of Xiao et al. is not appropriate. We show that Xiao et al. misinterpreted the results from the literature by opposing two sets of boundary conditions that are related to different material models of the temporal boundary.

© 2014 Optical Society of America

Reflection and transmission of electromagnetic waves at a temporal boundary

Yuzhe Xiao, Drew N. Maywar, and Govind P. Agrawal
Opt. Lett. 39(3) 574-577 (2014)

Simple design of slanted grating with simplified modal method: comment

Lifeng Li
Opt. Lett. 39(18) 5374-5374 (2014)

Null-field radiationless sources: comment

Iver Brevik
Opt. Lett. 40(10) 2365-2365 (2015)

“Tailoring axial intensity of laser beams with a heart-shaped hole,” by Wang et  al.: comment

Riccardo Borghi
Opt. Lett. 43(14) 3240-3240 (2018)

Asymmetric optical cryptosystem based on coherent superposition and equal modulus decomposition: comment

Xiaopeng Deng
Opt. Lett. 40(16) 3913-3913 (2015)