Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 51 references

Electrodynamics of Photonic Temporal Interfaces

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Temporal interfaces do not conserve displacement and induction by default; boundary conditions are set by the microscopic switching mechanism, with surface charge entering the scattering coefficients.

desk verdict The paper makes a genuine correction to the standard D,B-continuity assumption at temporal interfaces, with a clean derivation and an experimental anchor, though the ideal-switch idealization behind the E-continuous regime deserves a robustness check. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.15984 v1 pith:ZKPZSWJH submitted 2024-11-24 physics.optics cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.mtrl-sci

Emanuele Galiffi , Diego Martinez Solís , Shixiong Yin , Nader Engheta , Andrea Alù This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.opticscond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords temporalinterfacestime-varyingmediaelectromagneticboundaryconditionstimereflectionrefractionphotoniccrystalsdispersivetransmission-linemetamaterials
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper sets out to show that the electrodynamics of a temporal interface—an abrupt change in a material's permittivity or capacitance—cannot be described by a single universal conservation law. Integrating Maxwell's equations over an infinitesimally short time interval leaves the tangential magnetic induction continuous but allows the electric displacement to jump by an interface charge, and that charge is fixed by the microscopic mechanism that performs the switch. A charge-conserving switch reproduces the textbook continuity of D and B; a switch that removes or injects bound charge instead keeps E and H continuous, which is what a recent time-reflection experiment saw. The paper derives generalized scattering coefficients that depend on the ratio of interface charge to bound charge, and shows the same split in dispersive media between current continuity and flux-linkage continuity. This matters because time crystals, space-time metamaterials, and ultrafast optical switching are usually modeled with D,B continuity assumed.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the generalized temporal boundary condition, obtained by integrating Maxwell's equations over an infinitesimmal time slab around the interface: the tangential magnetic induction B_y stays continuous while the normal electric displacement D_x jumps by an amount equal to the interface charge sigma_se. In the paper's transmission-line picture, a permittivity switch is a parallel capacitor switched into or out of each unit cell, and the operation of that switch—whether it conserves, removes, or injects bound charge—fixes sigma_se in the boundary condition. The scattering amplitudes then follow from matching plane waves across the temporal jump, with the generalized coefficients of Eq. (7) covering arbitrary interface charge. This choice of conserved quantity, not the permittivity contrast alone, fixes the energy and momentum transferred to the scattered waves.

What would settle it

In a transmission-line or waveguide experiment, vary the parasitic capacitance or switching speed of the element that changes the permittivity, and measure the time-reflection and time-transmission amplitudes. The generalized boundary conditions predict that these amplitudes move with the extracted interface charge, coinciding with D-continuity for charge-conserving switches and E-continuity for charge-removing switches; if only D-continuity fits regardless of the switch design, the central claim is wrong.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a temporal interface is characterized not by a fixed conservation law but by a mechanism-dependent surface charge. Integrating Faraday's and Ampère-Maxwell's laws over a vanishing time interval yields generalized boundary conditions in which B_y is continuous and D_x jumps by sigma_se, the charge per unit area acquired or lost by the medium during the switch. Charge-conserving implementations reduce this to the conventional continuity of D and B and reproduce the textbook scattering coefficients; implementations that switch capacitors out of a circuit lose bound charge and instead conserve E and H, with the coefficients measured in recent experiments. For a Drude medium, the same distinction appears as conservation of conduction current versus conservation of magnetic flux linkage, affecting the amplitude of the DC wiggler mode and the energy and momentum exchanged. The generalized scattering coefficients, depending on the ratio of interface charge to bound charge, include an impedance-matching condition that suppresses time reflection entirely.

Load-bearing premise

The entire derivation leans on treating a switch as instantaneous and ideal—no parasitic capacitance, resistance, or finite ramp time—and on taking the lumped transmission line as an exact model of continuous electrodynamics, so the charge dynamics of the ideal circuit is the whole story; real switches could change the conservation law.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Conventional temporal-scattering calculations that assume D and B are continuous are valid only for charge-conserving switches; using them for charge-removing switches mispredicts the amplitudes of the time-refracted and time-reflected waves.
  • The same macroscopic permittivity change can yield different scattering products, energy balances, and momenta depending on whether the switch conserves, removes, or supplies bound charge, so experiments must specify the microscopic implementation.
  • For dispersive Drude media, whether the conduction current or the magnetic flux linkage is conserved determines the amplitude of the DC wiggler mode and the energy and momentum balance, extending the mechanism dependence beyond simple dielectrics.
  • Real systems may realize mixed boundary conditions in which only a fraction of the bound charge is conserved, and the paper's generalized formulas cover these intermediate cases, including a temporal impedance-matching condition at which time reflection vanishes.
  • The same reasoning applies to continuous parametric modulation, not only abrupt switches, because the rate at which charge is created or removed during a finite pump pulse determines which effective boundary conditions a smoothly varying medium obeys.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The authors do not pursue this, but the mechanism-dependence should carry over to photonic time-crystal band-structure calculations: if realistic switches remove or inject charge, the energy and momentum balances entering the band structure could differ from those predicted with D,B continuity.
  • One testable extension is to use the temporal impedance-matching condition as a design goal: by engineering a switch that removes exactly the right fraction of bound charge, a temporal interface could change the frequency of a transmitted wave while producing no time-reflected wave, a purely temporal analogue of antireflection coating.
  • The charge-versus-flux duality suggests an acoustic analogue: a sudden change in effective mass or stiffness implemented by adding or removing material should show the same split between conservation of velocity and conservation of momentum, offering a classical mechanical testbed for the classification.
  • The authors leave implicit that the extracted interface charge could be used as a diagnostic: measuring the ratio of time-reflected to time-transmitted amplitudes in a real ultrafast switch would infer how much bound charge actually enters or leaves the medium during the switching event.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a generalized electrodynamic description of photonic temporal interfaces (TIs). Starting from the integral forms of Maxwell's equations, it derives temporal boundary conditions that include a surface-charge term σ_se, leading to generalized scattering coefficients in Eq. (7) that reduce to the conventional D- and B-continuity case when σ_se = 0, and to E- and H-continuity when the charge discontinuity is maximal. The paper argues, using transmission-line circuit analogies, that the microscopic switching mechanism (closing/opening switches, adding/removing capacitors) determines the value of σ_se and therefore which conservation laws apply. It extends the formalism to dispersive (Drude) media through a flux-linkage sink/source and presents a duality between the charge and flux pictures. The central claim is that the boundary conditions at a TI are not universal but depend on the microscopic implementation.

Significance. If the central claim is correct, this work resolves an important discrepancy between the standard assumption of B- and D-continuity at temporal interfaces and recent experimental observations of E- and H-continuity. The generalized boundary conditions of Eq. (3) and the explicit scattering formulas of Eq. (7) provide a flexible framework that subsumes the conventional result as a special case, and the extension to Drude media with flux linkage offers a unified perspective. The paper is well grounded in the existing literature and the algebraic steps leading to Eq. (3) are straightforward and correct. A particular strength is the clear demonstration that the 'two-capacitor' energy-loss mechanism and the momentum change are consistent with the charge discontinuity. However, the predictive power of the framework depends on the value of σ_se, which is currently imposed by circuit-level idealizations rather than derived from a controlled microscopic limit. The paper also references an experimental comparison (Ref. 32) without showing quantitative agreement.

major comments (3)
  1. [Results, Eq. (3) and Fig. 2] The temporal surface charge σ_se is introduced as a free parameter in Eq. (3), but its value is not derived from the microscopic dynamics; it is imposed by ideal-switch circuit arguments. For the E-continuous case (Fig. 2c), the assertion that opening a switch removes the bound charge on C1 while leaving the voltage (and hence E) continuous assumes a specific homogenization limit (unit-cell size to zero, switching time to zero, no parasitic capacitance). A finite switching time or parasitic elements will alter the charge removed and therefore σ_se. To make Eq. (7) predictive for a given physical implementation, the paper should provide a controlled limiting procedure for the continuous-medium boundary conditions, or explicitly restrict the claims to ideal instantaneous switches; as written, the E-continuous coefficients in Eq. (5) may depend on the details of the switch model.
  2. [Paragraph after Eq. (5)] The statement that the E-continuous coefficients are 'consistent with those measured in 32' is not quantified anywhere in the manuscript. Since Ref. 32 is co-authored by some of the present authors and is the primary experimental motivation for the generalized boundary conditions, the absence of an overlay of the measured scattering coefficients with Eq. (5), or at least a discussion of the extracted σ_se, is a significant gap. Without this comparison, the manuscript does not substantiate that the E-continuous regime actually occurs in a realistic experiment.
  3. [Drude section, paragraph before Eq. (12)] The paper explicitly notes that 'an instantaneous model of this problem is only appropriate when the microscopic dynamics is much faster than the field oscillations' in the Drude context. This limitation applies equally to the non-dispersive scenarios in Fig. 2 and to the generalized boundary conditions of Eq. (3). The paper should state this caveat at the point of introducing Eq. (3) and discuss how a finite switching time or finite resistance would modify σ_se and the scattering coefficients. Without such an analysis, the claim that the boundary conditions 'strongly depend' on the implementation remains conditional on the ideal-switch assumption, and the reader cannot judge the robustness of the D- vs. E-continuous classification.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Equations throughout] The displayed equations, particularly Eqs. (4), (5), (7), and (9), appear to be corrupted in the provided text (missing square roots, misplaced operators, and garbled ratios). The final manuscript must be typeset cleanly to allow verification of these central formulas.
  2. [Introduction/Results] The verb 'debunk' in the Results section is not appropriate for a scientific argument; consider replacing it with 'discuss', 'clarify', or 'understand'.
  3. [Figure 2 caption] The bottom panels of Fig. 2 use multiple line styles and colors (continuous, dashed, dotted, red dot-dashed), but the caption does not identify which line corresponds to the forward and backward wave energy densities and the total momentum; please label these directly in the figure or expand the caption.
  4. [References] Several references (e.g., Refs. 30, 41, 42) lack complete bibliographic information such as page numbers or article numbers; please format all references consistently with the journal style.
  5. [Terminology] The manuscript uses both 'temporal interface' and 'time-interface' for the same concept; please use one term consistently throughout.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the generalized temporal boundary conditions follow from Maxwell's equations, and the E/H-continuous case is justified by explicit circuit topology rather than by a fitted parameter.

full rationale

The paper's central boundary conditions, Eq. (3), are derived by integrating Faraday's and Ampere-Maxwell's laws over an infinitesimal time window; the surface-charge term sigma_se enters as the time-integrated current, exactly as the derivation states, and is not fitted to any output of the paper. The D-continuous coefficients (Eq. 4), the E-continuous coefficients (Eq. 5), and the generalized coefficients (Eq. 7) are algebraic consequences of the same boundary conditions together with the constitutive relations, so no prediction is constructed from its own target. The E-continuous case is justified by an explicit circuit argument (two parallel capacitors, switch opening leaves the node voltage unchanged), and the comparison with the experiment in Ref. 32 is a validation rather than the source of the formulas; even though Ref. 32 shares authors, it is an externally reported experimental result and therefore independent support under the review rules. The Drude/plasma coefficients, Eq. (9), are quoted from Kalluri's standard text, and the paper's circuit model extends rather than fits them. The paper explicitly flags that the instantaneous model is only appropriate when the microscopic dynamics is much faster than the field oscillations; that is a robustness limitation, not a circular step. No equation or fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The core derivation rests on standard Maxwell equations, but the classification of boundary conditions depends on ideal-switch and homogenization assumptions, plus the introduction of a surface-charge parameter and a flux-linkage sink/source concept. The surface charge has indirect experimental support from Ref. 32; the flux-linkage sink does not.

free parameters (1)
  • Relative interface charge sigma_tilde_se = sigma_se / (epsilon_x D_x(t0^-))
    Parameterizes all possible temporal boundary conditions in Eq. (7). Its value is set by the microscopic switching mechanism, not fitted to data in this paper.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Maxwell's equations in the time domain (Eq. 1) hold for the macroscopic fields.
    Foundation of the derivation; standard electrodynamics.
  • domain assumption The temporal interface can be modeled as an instantaneous discontinuity, with fields integrated over an infinitesimal time interval to yield boundary conditions (Eq. 3).
    Justified only when switching is much faster than an optical cycle; the paper flags this in the Fig. 3c discussion: 'an instantaneous model of this problem is only appropriate when the microscopic dynamics is much faster than the field oscillations.'
  • domain assumption The transmission-line lumped-element circuit (capacitors, inductors, switches) is an exact analog of the continuous electromagnetic medium in the homogenization limit.
    Used throughout Figs. 2 and 3 to map charge/voltage and flux/current to D/E and B/H; if the analogy fails, the derived conservation laws may not transfer to real materials.
  • ad hoc to paper Ideal switches: switching events are instantaneous, lossless (except for modeled ohmic losses), and do not introduce additional parasitic modes.
    All four scenarios in Fig. 2 assume ideal switches and capacitors; real switches have finite resistance, parasitic capacitance, and switching dynamics.
  • domain assumption Drude conduction current obeys the circuit equation of motion (Eq. 8) with time-dependent density N(t) and effective mass m(t).
    Standard Drude model extended to time-varying plasma frequency.
invented entities (2)
  • Effective temporal surface charge sigma_se independent evidence
    purpose: Accounts for discontinuity in the normal component of D at the temporal interface; encapsulates charge lost or gained by the switching mechanism.
    Not a new particle; a physical charge. Its existence is supported by the experiment in Ref. 32, where E (not D) is continuous, implying a nonzero sigma_se. It is inferred from boundary-condition measurements rather than directly observed.
  • Flux linkage sink/source in the Drude model
    purpose: Represents magnetic flux (L J_c) removed or added by the switching event, analogous to sigma_se for charge, to explain current versus flux conservation.
    Postulated to explain the current-continuity versus flux-continuity dichotomy in the inductor model; no direct experimental observation is cited.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Electrodynamics of Photonic Temporal Interfaces." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZKPZSWJH

@misc{pith2026241115984,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Electrodynamics of Photonic Temporal Interfaces},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZKPZSWJH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.15984}
}
read the original abstract

Exotic forms of wave control have been emerging by engineering matter in space and time. In this framework, temporal photonic interfaces, i.e., abrupt changes in the electromagnetic properties of a material, have been shown to induce temporal scattering phenomena dual to spatial reflection and refraction, at the basis of photonic time crystals and space-time metamaterials. Despite decades-old theoretical studies on these topics, and recent experimental demonstrations, the careful modeling of these phenomena has been lagging behind. Here, we develop from first principles a rigorous model of the electrodynamics of temporal photonic interfaces, highlighting the crucial role of the mechanisms driving time variations. We demonstrate that the boundary conditions and conservation laws associated with temporal scattering may substantially deviate from those commonly employed in the literature, based on their microscopic implementation. Our results open new vistas for both fundamental investigations over light-matter interactions in time-varying structures and for the prospect of their future implementations and applications in optics and photonics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.15984 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a,b) Spatial and (c,d) temporal interfaces, represented as (a,c) transmission lines with abruptly varying capacitance per unit length and (b,d) materials with abruptly varying permittivity. Dual to the way surface currents at a spatial interface may cause a discontinuity in the tangential magnetic field H, interface charges at a temporal interface can induce a discontinuity in the displacement field D. In the case … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a-b) Assuming that the bound charge Q is conserved, a permittivity increase 12  → (a), represented in a transmission-line as the on-switching of a parallel lumped capacitor C1 , results in charge redistribution, which reduces the voltage V (electric field). In turn, this redistribution reduces (a, bottom) the total energy density U (continuous, dashed and dotted lines denote respectively total, forward and backwa… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a, top) An increase in plasma frequency can be modeled as the shorting of a series inductor in the shunt branch of a transmission-line. In this scenario, the current J in the branch remains unchanged, along with the flux linkage on L a , whereas the flux on Lb is lost. Mechanically, this scenario is analogous to particles leaving the system (e.g. droplets leaving a water bucket) with their instantaneous velocity, c… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Pendry, J. B. (2008). Time reversal and negative refraction. Science, 322(5898), 71-73

    work page 2008

  2. [2]

    Bruno, V ., DeVault, C., V ezzoli, S., et al. (2020). Negative refraction in time-varying strongly coupled plasmonic-antenna– epsilon-near-zero systems. Physical Review Letters, 124(4), 043902

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    Prain, A., Vezzoli, S., Westerberg, N., et al . (2017). Spontaneous photon production in time -dependent epsilon-near-zero materials. Physical Review Letters, 118(13), 133904

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    A., & Capolino, F

    Othman, M. A., & Capolino, F. (2017). Theory of exceptional points of degeneracy in uniform coupled waveguides and balance of gain and loss. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, 65(10), 5289-5302

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    S., Asadchy, V

    Wang, X., Mirmoosa, M. S., Asadchy, V . S., et al. (2023). Metasurface-based realization of photonic time crystals. Science Advances, 9(14), eadg7541

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    D., Johansson, J

    Nation, P. D., Johansson, J. R., Blencowe, M. P ., et al. (2012). Colloquium: Stimulating uncertainty: Amplifying the quantum vacuum with superconducting circuits. Reviews of Modern Physics, 84(1), 1

    work page 2012

  7. [7]

    A., & Pendry, J

    Galiffi, E., Huidobro, P. A., & Pendry, J. B. (2019). Broadband nonreciprocal amplification in luminal metamaterials. Physical Review Letters, 123(20), 206101

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    A., & Pendry, J

    Horsley, S. A., & Pendry, J. B. (2023). Quantum electrodynamics of time -varying gratings. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120(36), e2302652120

    work page 2023

Show all 51 references
  1. [9]

    Cheng, D., Wang, K., & Fan, S. (2023). Artificial non -Abelian lattice gauge fields for photons in the synthetic frequency dimension. Physical Review Letters, 130(8), 083601

    2023

  2. [10]

    Lustig, E., Sharabi, Y ., & Segev, M. (2018). Topological aspects of photonic time crystals. Optica, 5(11), 1390-1395

    2018

  3. [11]

    A., Galiffi, E., Guenneau, S., et al

    Huidobro, P . A., Galiffi, E., Guenneau, S., et al. (2019). Fresnel drag in space–time-modulated metamaterials. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(50), 24943-24948

    2019

  4. [12]

    Yu, Z., & Fan, S. (2009). Complete optical isolation created by indirect interband photonic transitions. Nature Photonics, 3(2), 91-94

    2009

  5. [13]

    L., Sieck, C

    Fleury, R., Sounas, D. L., Sieck, C. F., et al. (2014). Sound isolation and giant linear nonreciprocity in a compact acoustic circulator. Science, 343(6170), 516-519

    2014

  6. [14]

    L., & Alù, A

    Sounas, D. L., & Alù, A. (2017). Non-reciprocal photonics based on time modulation. Nature Photonics, 11(12), 774-783

    2017

  7. [15]

    D., Fang, K., Nussenzveig, P ., et al

    Tzuang, L. D., Fang, K., Nussenzveig, P ., et al. (2014). Non-reciprocal phase shift induced by an effective magnetic flux for light. Nature Photonics, 8(9), 701-705

    2014

  8. [16]

    L., Chamanara, N., Skorobogatiy, M., et al

    Deck-Léger, Z. L., Chamanara, N., Skorobogatiy, M., et al. (2019). Uniform-velocity spacetime crystals. Advanced Photonics, 1(5), 056002

    2019

  9. [17]

    Camacho, M., Edwards, B., & Engheta, N. (2020). Achieving asymmetry and trapping in diffusion with spatiotemporal metamaterials. Nature Communications, 11(1), 3733

    2020

  10. [18]

    Buddhiraju, S., Li, W., & Fan, S. (2020). Photonic refrigeration from time -modulated thermal emission. Physical Review Letters, 124(7), 077402

    2020

  11. [19]

    E., & Liberal, I

    Vázquez-Lozano, J. E., & Liberal, I. (2023). Incandescent temporal metamaterials. Nature Communications, 14(1), 4606

    2023

  12. [20]

    Yu, R., & Fan, S. (2023). Manipulating coherence of near-field thermal radiation in time-modulated systems. Physical Review Letters, 130(9), 096902

    2023

  13. [21]

    Galiffi, E., Xu, G., Yin, S., et al. (2023). Broadband coherent wave control through photonic collisions at time interfaces. Nature Physics, 19(11), 1703-1708

    2023

  14. [22]

    Lyubarov, M., Lumer, Y ., Dikopoltsev, A., et al . (2022). Amplified emission and lasing in photonic time crystals. Science, 377(6604), 425-428

    2022

  15. [23]

    Pacheco-Peña, V ., & Engheta, N. (2020). Antireflection temporal coatings. Optica, 7(4), 323-331

    2020

  16. [24]

    E., & Pacheco‐Peña, V

    Liberal, I., Vázquez‐Lozano, J. E., & Pacheco‐Peña, V . (2023). Quantum antireflection temporal coatings: quantum state frequency shifting and inhibited thermal noise amplification. Laser & Photonics Reviews, 17(9), 2200720

    2023

  17. [25]

    Pacheco-Peña, V ., & Engheta, N. (2020). Temporal aiming. Light: Science & Applications, 9(1), 129

    2020

  18. [26]

    Galiffi, E., Tirole, R., Yin, S., et al. (2022). Photonics of time-varying media. Advanced Photonics, 4(1), 014002

    2022

  19. [27]

    Z., Karimi, M., et al

    Zhou, Y ., Alam, M. Z., Karimi, M., et al. (2020). Broadband frequency translation through time refraction in an epsilon-near- zero material. Nature Communications, 11(1), 2180

    2020

  20. [28]

    Lustig, E., Segal, O., Saha, S., et al. (2023). Time-refraction optics with single cycle modulation. Nanophotonics, 12(12), 2221-2230

    2023

  21. [29]

    Tirole, R., Vezzoli, S., Galiffi, E., et al. (2023). Double-slit time diffraction at optical frequencies. Nature Physics, 19, 999- 1002

    2023

  22. [30]

    Morgenthaler, F. R. (1958). V elocity modulation of electromagnetic waves. IRE Transactions on microwave theory and techniques, 6(2), 167-172

    1958

  23. [31]

    Bacot, V ., Labousse, M., Eddi, A., et al. (2016). Time reversal and holography with spacetime transformations. Nature Physics, 12(10), 972-977

    2016

  24. [32]

    Moussa, H., Xu, G., Yin, S., et al. (2023). Observation of temporal reflection and broadband frequency translation at photonic time interfaces. Nature Physics, 19, 863-868

    2023

  25. [33]

    Galiffi, E., Yin, S., & Alú, A. (2022). Tapered photonic switching. Nanophotonics, 11(16), 3575-3581

    2022

  26. [34]

    T., & Shukla, P

    Mendonça, J. T., & Shukla, P. K. (2002). Time refraction and time reflection: two basic concepts. Physica Scripta, 65(2), 160

    2002

  27. [35]

    Kalluri, D. K. (2018). Electromagnetics of time varying complex media: frequency and polarization transformer. CRC Press. Boca Raton

    2018

  28. [36]

    Kong, J. A. (1975). Theory of electromagnetic waves. EMW Publishing. New York

    1975

  29. [37]

    Zucker, C. (1955). Condenser problem. American Journal of Physics, 23(7), 469-469

    1955

  30. [38]

    E., et al

    Ortega-Gomez, A., Lobet, M., Vázquez-Lozano, J. E., et al. (2023). Tutorial on the conservation of momentum in photonic time-varying media. Optical Materials Express, 13(6), 1598-1608

    2023

  31. [39]

    F., Fechner, M., et al

    Cartella, A., Nova, T. F., Fechner, M., et al. (2018). Parametric amplification of optical phonons. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(48), 12148-12151

    2018

  32. [40]

    B., & Monticone, F

    Hayran, Z., Khurgin, J. B., & Monticone, F. (2022). ℏω versus ℏk: dispersion and energy constraints on time-varying photonic materials and time crystals. Optical Materials Express, 12(10), 3904-3917

    2022

  33. [41]

    Khurgin, J. B. (2023). Energy and power requirements for alteration of the refractive index. Laser & Photonics Reviews, 18(4), 2300836

    2023

  34. [42]

    Khurgin, J. B. (2023). Photonic time crystals and parametric amplification: similarity and distinction. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.15243

    2023 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Lobet, M., Kinsey, N., Liberal, I., et al . (2023). New horizons in near -zero refractive index photonics and hyperbolic metamaterials. ACS photonics, 10(11), 3805-3820

    2023

  36. [44]

    Narimanov, E. E. (2023). Ultrafast Optical Modulation by Virtual Interband Transitions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.15908

    2023 arXiv

  37. [45]

    W., Sarkar, S., & Sivan, Y

    Un, I. W., Sarkar, S., & Sivan, Y . (2023). Electronic-Based Model of the Optical Nonlinearity of Low-Electron-Density Drude Materials. Physical Review Applied, 19(4), 044043

    2023

  38. [46]

    W., & Sivan, Y

    Sarkar, S., Un, I. W., & Sivan, Y . (2023). Electronic and Thermal Response of Low -Electron-Density Drude Materials to Ultrafast Optical Illumination. Physical Review Applied, 19(1), 014005

    2023

  39. [47]

    Nishida, A., Y ugami, N., Higashiguchi, T., et al . (2012). Experimental observation of frequency up -conversion by flash ionization. Applied Physics Letters, 101(16), 161118

    2012

  40. [48]

    Avitzour, Y ., & Shvets, G. (2008). Manipulating electromagnetic waves in magnetized plasmas: Compression, frequency shifting, and release. Physical Review Letters, 100(6), 065006

    2008

  41. [49]

    S., Tollerton, C., et al

    Bohn, J., Luk, T. S., Tollerton, C., et al. (2021). All-optical switching of an epsilon-near-zero plasmon resonance in indium tin oxide. Nature communications, 12(1), 1017

    2021

  42. [50]

    Horsley, S. A. R., Galiffi, E., & Wang, Y . T. (2023). Eigenpulses of dispersive time -varying media. Physical Review Letters, 130(20), 203803

    2023

  43. [51]

    Y ., Bekshaev, A

    Bliokh, K. Y ., Bekshaev, A. Y ., & Nori, F. (2017). Optical momentum, spin, and angular momentum in dispersive media. Physical Review Letters, 119(7), 073901

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.