Editor-in-Chief, Alexandra Boltasseva, discusses Opinions, a unique article format in Optical Materials Express.
© 2021 Optica Publishing Group under the terms of the Optica Open Access Publishing Agreement
To better reflect the dynamics of research and real-life scientific discussions, in July 2019, Optical Materials Express began publishing Opinions – a new article type presenting the perspectives of key experts and thought-leaders in the field. These concise, invitation-only articles are not ordinary research articles or reviews, but instead provide valuable observations and discussion on current or emerging topics that are generating significant interest – and sometimes heated conversations – in the research community. Although they contain a brief objective introduction to provide context, the focus is on the author’s unique opinion on the topic and how it may develop and influence the field or technology in the future. They contain critical insights, discuss important solutions or applications, or critique existing methods or procedures. They may be controversial on occasion.
In the first Opinion published, Nathaniel Kinsey and Jacob Khurgin consider the merits of so-called epsilon-near-zero materials – exotic optical media that are currently uncovering new horizons in fundamental optics as well as novel photonic applications . Other examples of this article type include those from Guangwei Hu, Cheng-Wei Qiu, and Andrea Alù, who provide an excitng outlook on emerging photonic phenomena and applications enabled by twisting and stacking nanostructures , and Michael Dobinson and Reuven Gordon, who discuss the fundamental limits of gap plasmon structures . Most recently, Simo Pajovic, Yoichiro Tsurimaki, Xin Qian, and Svetlana V. Boriskina wrote about remarkable opportunities for exploring thermal radiation in inversion symmetry- and time reversal symmetry-breaking materials .
From a personal point of view, I find the foundational insights in these articles exceptionally valuable and helpful, and I enjoy reading the deep – and often unconventional – thoughts of these influential researchers. I hope you do too. We have several more excellent Opinions lined up, and I’m looking forward to sharing these new critical perspectives at the intersection of optics and materials science.
I’m grateful to the authors who have already given their time and energy to contribute their Opinions to the Journal and to those who have committed to do so in the coming months. We welcome suggestions of future topics to cover or authors whose perspectives you would like to read. Please don’t hesitate to get in touch and send us your opinion via email@example.com.
1. N. Kinsey and J. Khurgin, “Nonlinear epsilon-near-zero materials explained: opinion,” Opt. Mater. Express 9(7), 2793–2796 (2019). [CrossRef]
2. G. Hu, C. Qiu, and A. Alù, “Twistronics for photons: opinion,” Opt. Mater. Express 11(5), 1377–1382 (2021). [CrossRef]
3. R. Gordon and M. Dobinson, “Plasmonics–mine the gap: opinion,” Opt. Mater. Express 11(7), 2192–2196 (2021). [CrossRef]
4. S. Pajovic, Y. Tsurimaki, X. Qian, and S. Boriskina, “Radiative heat and momentum transfer from materials with broken symmetries: opinion,” Opt. Mater. Express 11(9), 3125–3131 (2021). [CrossRef]