Abstract

This is the reply to the comment by Chavez-Cerda and Pu [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 32, 1209 (2015) [CrossRef]  ] on our recent work about the 50,000λ long needle-like field [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 31, 500 (2014) [CrossRef]  ]. First, they employed an incorrect boundary condition as the fundament of their argument. In fact, it is not the electric field but its tangential component that must be zero at the surface of the perfect metal. Our result is completely consistent with the correct boundary condition. Second, a constant phase factor in the incident radially polarized beam, exp(jπ/4), for instance, has no influence on the result. Accordingly, our initial condition is proper.

© 2015 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article

References

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Citation lists with outbound citation links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an OSA member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access OSA Member Subscription

Cited By

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Cited by links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an OSA member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access OSA Member Subscription

Figures (2)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Figure files are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an OSA member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access OSA Member Subscription

Metrics

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Article level metrics are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an OSA member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access OSA Member Subscription