tremendous progress has been realized in the last decades concerning the theoretical foundation of quantum optics in dielectric media . while the historical approach proposed by jauch and watson  @xcite was already based on the standard canonical quantization formalism for fields , it neglected dispersion and dissipation which are intrinsic properties of any causal dielectric media satisfying kramers krnig relations . since then
several important studies were devoted to the extension of the method to inhomogeneous and artificially structured media which are central issues in modern micro and nano photonics  @xcite .
furthermore , theoretical approaches adapted to transparent but dispersive media with negligible losses have been also developed based on different techniques such as the slowly varying envelope approximation  @xcite or the quasi modal expansion method which is valid near resonance for polaritons  @xcite .
more recently , losses were included in the theory by adding phenomenologically some optical dissipation channels in the light propagation path  @xcite .
such a method was successfully used for the modeling of casimir forces in dissipative media  @xcite and surface plasmon polaritons  @xcite .
+ moreover , the most fundamental progress was probably done when huttner and barnett , and others  @xcite proposed a self - consistent canonical quantization procedure for an homogeneous and causal dielectric medium by coupling photonic degrees of freedom with mechanical oscillator variables acting as thermal baths .
the method , based on the pioneer works by fano and hopfield @xcite ( see also ref .
@xcite ) , was subsequently extended to several inhomogeneous systems including anisotropic and magnetic properties  @xcite . in parallel to these theoretical works based on the standard canonical quantization method , a different and powerful axis of research appeared after the work by gruner and welsch  @xcite ( see also ref.@xcite ) based on the quantum langevin noise approach used in cavity qed ( i.e. , quantum electrodynamics )  @xcite .
the method is also known as the green tensor method  @xcite since it relies on efficient green dyadic techniques used nowadays in nano - photonics and plasmonics  @xcite .
this ` langevin - noise ' approach , which actually extends earlier ` semi classical ' researches based on the fluctuation - dissipation theorem by lifshitz and many others in the context of casimir and optical forces  @xcite , was successfully applied in the recent years to many issues concerning photonics  @xcite and nano - plasmonics where dissipation can not be neglected  @xcite . in this context
the relationship between the huttner - barnett approach on the one side and the langevin noise method on the other side has attracted much attention in the last years , and several works attempted to demonstrate the validity of the langevin noise method from a rigorous hamiltonian perspective which is more in a agreement with the canonical huttner - barnett approach  @xcite .
+ the aim of this work is to revisit these derivations of the equivalence between the langevin noise and hamitonian method and to show that some unphysical assumptions actually limit the domain of validity of the previous attempts .
more precisely , as we will show in this work , the analysis and derivations always included some hypothesis concerning causality and boundary conditions which actually lead to circularity in the deductions and are not applicable to the most general inhomogeneous systems used in nano - optics .
specifically , these derivations , like the fluctuation - dissipation reasoning in lifshitz and rytov works  @xcite , give too much emphasis on the material origin of quantum fluctuations for explaining macroscopic quantum electrodynamics in continuous media .
however , as it was already pointed out in the 1970 s  @xcite , one must include with an equal footings both field and matter fluctuations in a self consistent qed hamiltonian in order to preserve rigorously unitarity and causality  @xcite . while this does nt impact too much the homogeneous medium case considered by huttner and barnett  @xcite it is crucial to analyze further the inhomogeneous medium problem in order to give a rigorous foundation to the gruner and welsch theory  @xcite based on fluctuating currents .
this is the central issue tackled in the present work .
+ the layout of this paper is as follows : in section ii we review the lagrangian method developed in our previous work  @xcite based on an alternative dual formalism for describing the huttner - barnett model . in this section
we summarize the essential elements of the general lagrangian and hamiltonian model necessary for the present study .
in particular we present the fundamental issue about the correct definition of hamiltonian which will be discussed at length in this article . in section iii
we provide a quantitative discussion of the huttner - barnett model for an homogeneous dielectric medium .
we discuss a modal expansion into plane waves and separate explicitly the electromagnetic field into classical eigenmodes and noise related langevin s modes .
we show that both contributions are necessary for preserving unitarity and time symmetry .
we consider limit cases such as the ideal hopfield - fano polaritons @xcite without dissipation and the weakly dissipative polariton modes considered by milonni and others  @xcite .
we discuss the physical interpretation of the hamiltonian of the whole system and interpret the various contributions with respect to the langevin noise method and to the loss - less hopfield - fano limit . in section
iv we generalize our analysis to the inhomogeneous medium case by using a green dyadic formalism in both the frequency and time domain .
we demonstrate that in general it is necessary to keep both pure photonic and material fluctuations to preserve the unitarity and time symmetry of the quantum evolution .
we conclude with a discussion about the physical meaning of the hamiltonian in presence of inhomogeneities and interpret the various terms associated with photonic and material modes .
in ref .  @xcite we developed a new lagrangian formalism adapted to qed in dielectric media without magnetic properties . here we will use this model to derive our approach but a standard treatment based on the minimal coupling scheme  @xcite or the power - zienau  @xcite transformation would lead to similar results .
we start with the dual lagrangian density : @xmath0 where @xmath1 and @xmath2 are the magnetic and displacement fields respectively . in this formalism
the usual magnetic potential @xmath3 , defined such as @xmath4 , is replaced by the dual electric potential @xmath5 ( in the ` coulomb ' gauge @xmath6 ) defined by @xmath7 implying @xmath8 the material part @xmath9 of the lagrangian density in eq .
[ 1 ] reads @xmath10 with @xmath11 the material oscillator fields describing the huttner - barnett bath coupled to the electromagnetic field .
the coupling depends on the polarization density which is defined by @xmath12 where the coupling function @xmath13 defines the conductivity of the medium at the harmonic pulsation @xmath14 . from eq .
[ 1 ] and euler - lagrange equations we deduce the dynamical laws for the electromagnetic field @xmath15 with the electric field @xmath16 .
similarly for the material oscillators we have : @xmath17we point out that the lagrangian density in eq .
[ 1 ] includes a term @xmath18 which is necessary for the derivation of the dynamical laws for the material fields @xmath19 @xcite .
furthermore , to complete the qed canonical quantization procedure of the material field we introduce the lowering @xmath20 and rising @xmath21 operators for the bosonic material field from the relation @xmath22 . as explained in ref .
@xcite by using the equal time commutation relations between the canonical variables @xmath11 and
@xmath23 , we deduce the fundamental rules @xmath24=\delta(\omega-\omega')\delta^3(\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{x'})\textbf{i}. \label{33}\end{aligned}\ ] ] ( with @xmath25 the unit dyad ) and @xmath26=[\mathbf{f}^\dagger_\omega(\mathbf{x},t),\mathbf{f}^\dagger_{\omega'}(\mathbf{x}',t)]=0 $ ] allowing a clear interpretation of @xmath20 and @xmath27 as lowering and rising operators for the bosonic states associated with the matter oscillators .
+ moreover , eqs .
[ 5],[8 ] can be formally integrated leading to @xmath28 where @xmath29 is an initial time and where @xmath30 is a fluctuating dipole density distribution defined by : @xmath31 \nonumber\\ \label{35}\end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath32 and where by definition @xmath33 .
we therefore have @xmath34 which is reminiscent of the general linear response theory used in thermodynamics  @xcite .
we point out that the term @xmath35 can be seen as an induced dipole density .
however , as we will show in the next section the electric field itself is decomposed into a purely fluctuating term @xmath36 and a scattered field @xmath37 which depends on the density @xmath38 .
therefore , the contribution @xmath35 to @xmath39 is also decomposed into a pure photon - fluctuation term @xmath40 and an induced term @xmath41 related to material fluctuations @xmath38 .
+ importantly , the linear susceptibility @xmath42 which is defined by @xmath43 characterizes completely the dispersive and dissipative dielectric medium .
we can show that the permittivity @xmath44 is an analytical function in the upper part of the complex plane @xmath45 , i.e. , @xmath46 , provided @xmath42 is finite for any time @xmath47 . from this
we deduce the symmetry @xmath48 and it is possible to derive the general kramers - krnig relations existing between the real part @xmath49\equiv\widetilde{\varepsilon}'(\mathbf{x},\omega)$ ] and the imaginary part @xmath50\equiv\widetilde{\varepsilon}''(\mathbf{x},\omega)$ ] of the dielectric permittivity .
therefore , the huttner - barnett model characterized by the conductivity @xmath51 is fully causal and can be applied to describe any inhomogeneous dielectric media in the linear regime .
+ the central issue of the present paper concerns the definition of the hamiltonian @xmath52 in the huttner - barnett model .
we remind that in ref .  @xcite we derived the result : @xmath53 with @xmath54 where @xmath55:$ ] means , as usually , a normally - ordered product for removing the infinite zero - point energy . inserting the definition for @xmath20 obtained
earlier we get for the material part @xmath56 which has the standard structure for oscillators ( i.e. , without the infinite zero - point energy ) .
+ however , hutner and barnett  @xcite after diagonalizing their hamiltonian found that the total evolution is described in the homogeneous medium case by @xmath57 while as we will see this is actually a correct description ` for all practical purpose ' in a homogeneous dissipative medium for large class of physical boundary conditions , this is in general not acceptable in order to preserve time - symmetry and unitarity in the full hilbert space for interacting matter and light . the general method based on langevin forces and noises avoided quite generally mentioning that difficult point .
we emphasize that while the conclusions presented in refs .
@xcite is accepted by more or less all authors on the subject  @xcite they have been some some few dissident views ( see refs .
@xcite ) claiming , that in the context of an input - output formalism , the langevin noise formalism is not complete unless we consider as well fluctuations of the free photon modes ( see also the replies with an opposite perspective in refs .
@xcite ) . in the present work we will generalize and give a rigrous qed like hamiltonian foundations to the prescriptions of refs .
@xcite and we will show that it is actually necessary to include a full description of photonic and material quantum excitations in order to preserve unitarity . in order to appreciate this fact further we will first consider the problem associated with quantization of the electromagnetic field .
we first introduce the paradigmatic homogeneous medium case considered initially by huttner and barnett  @xcite , i.e. , with @xmath58 .
we start with faraday s law : @xmath59 rewritten according to eq .
[ 21 ] as : @xmath60 inserting eq .
[ 4 ] and using the coulomb ( transverse ) gauge condition we get : @xmath61 we use the modal expansion method developed in ref .
@xcite and write @xmath62 with @xmath63 a generic label for the wave vector @xmath64 , @xmath65 ( here we consider as it is usually done the periodical ` box ' born - von karman expansion in the rectangular box of volume @xmath66 ) , @xmath67 or 2 , labels the two transverse polarization states with unit vectors @xmath68 , and @xmath69 ( conventions and details are given in appendix a of ref .
@xcite ) . inserting eq .  [ 40 ] into eq .  [ 91 ] we obtain the dynamical equation : @xmath70 with the time dependent source term @xmath71 to solve this equation we use the laplace transform of the fields which is defined below .
+ we are interested in the evolution for @xmath72 of a field @xmath73 which fourier transform is not necessary well mathematically defined since the field is not going to zero fast enough for @xmath74 ( e.g. , a fluctuating current or field ) .
the method followed here is to consider the forward laplace transform of the different evolution equations ( such an approach was also used by suttorp by mixing both forward and backward laplace s transforms  @xcite ) . to deal with this problem we first change the time @xmath75 variable in @xmath76 and define @xmath77 .
we define the ( forward ) laplace transform of @xmath78 as : @xmath79 with @xmath80 ( @xmath14 a real number and @xmath81 ) .
the presence of the term @xmath82 ensures the convergence .
we will not here introduce the backward laplace transform @xmath83 since the time @xmath29 is arbitrary and can be sent into the remote past if needed . +
as it is well known , the ( forward ) laplace transform is connected to the usual fourier transform since we have @xmath84 where @xmath85 is the fourier transform of @xmath86 with respect to @xmath75 . + now for the specific problem considered here we obtain the separation @xmath87 .
the @xmath88 contribution corresponds to what classically we call a sum of eigenmodes supported by the medium ( i.e. with @xmath89 ) while the @xmath90 term is the fluctuating field generated by the langevin source @xmath91 .
more explicitly , we have for the source term : @xmath92 where we use eq .  [ 93 ] .
the propagator function @xmath93 is expressed as a bromwich contour : @xmath94 where @xmath95 is defined as @xmath96 .
we remind that a bromwich integral by definition will vanish for @xmath97 so that on the left side we actually mean @xmath98 .
+ the function @xmath93 has some remarkable properties which should be emphasized here .
we first introduce the ` zeros ' of @xmath99 , i.e. , the set of roots @xmath100 solutions of @xmath101 . from the causal properties of @xmath102 we have @xmath103 and
therefore we deduce @xmath104 implying that the ` + ' and ` - ' roots are not independent .
the important fact is that the roots are located in the lower complex plane associated with a negative imaginary part of the frequency  @xcite ( this is proven in appendix a ) .
now , as shown in appendix b the integral in eq .  [ 95 ] can be computed by contour integration in the complex plane after closing the contour with a semi - circle in the lower plane and using the cauchy residue theorem .
we get : @xmath105 we also get @xmath106 for @xmath107 ( after integration in the upper plane and considering in detail the case @xmath108 ) .
clearly , the function @xmath93 is here expanded into a sum of modes which define the polaritons of the problem ( this is shown explicitly in the next subsection ) . here , the normal mode frequency @xmath109 are complex numbers ensuring the damped nature of the waves in the future direction .
we emphasize that in our knowledge this kind of formula has never been discussed before .
the expansion in eq .
[ 98 ] is however rigorous and generalizes the quasimodal approximations used in the weak dissipation regime and discussed in subsection iii(f ) . +
similarly the source - free term @xmath110 reads : @xmath111 with the new propagator function @xmath112 like for @xmath113 we get @xmath114 for @xmath107 .
additionally , the boundary condition at @xmath115 ( i.e. , @xmath116 ) imposes @xmath117 ( see appendix b ) .
+      the electromagnetic field can be calculated using the expansion eq .
[ 94 ] or [ 100 ] .
first , the mathematical and physical structure of the free - field is seen by using the modal expansion : @xmath118\boldsymbol{\hat{\epsilon}}_{\alpha , j}\phi_\alpha(\mathbf{x})\nonumber\\ = \sum_{\alpha , j , m}\frac{-\tilde{\varepsilon}(\omega_{\alpha , m}^{(-)})}{2i\omega_\alpha}\frac{e^{-i\omega_{\alpha , m}^{(-)}(t - t_0)}}{\frac{\partial(\omega\sqrt{\tilde{\varepsilon}(\omega)})}{\partial \omega}|_{\omega_{\alpha , m}^{(-)}}}[\dot{q}_{\alpha , j}(t_0)\nonumber\\-i\omega_{\alpha , m}^{(-)}q_{\alpha , j}(t_0)]\boldsymbol{\hat{\epsilon}}_{\alpha , j}\phi_\alpha(\mathbf{x } ) + hcc.\label{117}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we used the symmetries of the modal expansion  @xcite together with @xmath119 . from this
we directly obtain : @xmath120\boldsymbol{\hat{k}}_{\alpha}\times\boldsymbol{\hat{\epsilon}}_{\alpha , j}\phi_\alpha(\mathbf{x})\nonumber\\ = \sum_{\alpha , j , m}\frac{-\tilde{\varepsilon}(\omega_{\alpha , m}^{(-)})}{2c}\frac{e^{-i\omega_{\alpha , m}^{(-)}(t - t_0)}}{\frac{\partial(\omega\sqrt{\tilde{\varepsilon}(\omega)})}{\partial \omega}|_{\omega_{\alpha , m}^{(-)}}}[\dot{q}_{\alpha , j}(t_0)\nonumber\\-i\omega_{\alpha , m}^{(-)}q_{\alpha , j}(t_0)]\boldsymbol{\hat{k}}_{\alpha}\times\boldsymbol{\hat{\epsilon}}_{\alpha , j}\phi_\alpha(\mathbf{x } ) + hcc .
\label{118}\end{aligned}\ ] ] and similarly for the magnetic field : @xmath121\boldsymbol{\hat{\epsilon}}_{\alpha , j}\phi_\alpha(\mathbf{x})\nonumber\\ = \sum_{\alpha , j , m}\frac{\omega_{\alpha , m}^{(-)}\tilde{\varepsilon}(\omega_{\alpha , m}^{(-)})}{2c\omega_\alpha}\frac{e^{-i\omega_{\alpha , m}^{(-)}(t - t_0)}}{\frac{\partial(\omega\sqrt{\tilde{\varepsilon}(\omega)})}{\partial \omega}|_{\omega_{\alpha , m}^{(-)}}}[\dot{q}_{\alpha , j}(t_0)\nonumber\\-i\omega_{\alpha , m}^{(-)}q_{\alpha , j}(t_0)]\boldsymbol{\hat{\epsilon}}_{\alpha , j}\phi_\alpha(\mathbf{x } ) + hcc .
\label{119}\end{aligned}\ ] ] the ( transverse ) electric field associated with this free solutions can also be obtained from the definition @xmath122 .
we have thus @xmath123 and considering the laplace transform in eqs .
[ 100 ] and [ 101 ] we can express the electric field as a function of @xmath93 , i.e. , @xmath124\boldsymbol{\hat{k}}_{\alpha}\times\boldsymbol{\hat{\epsilon}}_{\alpha , j}\phi_\alpha(\mathbf{x})\nonumber\\ = \sum_{\alpha , j , m}\frac{-1}{2c}\frac{e^{-i\omega_{\alpha , m}^{(-)}(t - t_0)}}{\frac{\partial(\omega\sqrt{\tilde{\varepsilon}(\omega)})}{\partial \omega}|_{\omega_{\alpha , m}^{(-)}}}[\dot{q}_{\alpha , j}(t_0)\nonumber\\-i\omega_{\alpha , m}^{(-)}q_{\alpha , j}(t_0)]\boldsymbol{\hat{k}}_{\alpha}\times\boldsymbol{\hat{\epsilon}}_{\alpha , j}\phi_\alpha(\mathbf{x } ) + hcc . \label{120}\end{aligned}\ ] ] from eqs .  [ 119 ] and [ 120 ] we see that @xmath125 in agreement with maxwell s equation for a free - field ( the other maxwell s equations are also automatically fulfilled by definition ) .
+ importantly , in the vacuum case where @xmath126 we have @xmath127 and we find that the vacuum fields are given by @xmath128 with @xmath129 as expected . in the general case
however causality imposes that the imaginary part of @xmath109 is negative .
therefore the optical modes labeled by @xmath63 , @xmath130 and @xmath131 are damped in time ( the only exception being of course the vacuum case where the only contribution to the field arises from the source - free term @xmath88 since the @xmath90 terms vanishes together with @xmath38 ) . as a consequence ,
if @xmath132 the free terms vanish asymptotically . in particular ,
if @xmath133 ( corresponding to initial conditions fixed in the infinite remote past ) we can omit for all practical purposes the contribution of @xmath134 , @xmath135 , and @xmath136 to the field observed at any finite time @xmath75 ( unless we are in the vacuum ) .
this is indeed what was implicitly done by huttner and barnet  @xcite and gruner and welsch  @xcite and that is why for all calculational needs they completely omitted the discussion of the @xmath134 , @xmath135 , and @xmath136 fields .
however , for preserving the unitarity of the full evolution one must necessarily include both @xmath88 and @xmath90 terms . while this problem is apparently only technical we will see in the following its importance for inhomogeneous systems .
+      the previous discussion concerning the omission of the @xmath88 source free terms is very important since it explains the mechanism at work in the huttner barnet model  @xcite . to clarify that point
further we now express the scattered field @xmath90 using a green tensor formalism ( in appendix c we introduce alternative descriptions based on vectorial and scalar potentials ) .
we first observe that from @xmath137 we obtain after integration by parts : @xmath138 with the dyadic propagator  @xcite : @xmath139 the meaning of the tensor @xmath140 , which depends on @xmath141 , becomes more clear if we introduce the green tensor @xmath142 solution of @xmath143 we observe that if we separate the tensor into a transverse and longitudinal part we get @xmath144 with for the transverse dyadic green function @xmath145 and for the longitudinal part @xmath146 with the unit longitudinal dyadic distribution @xmath147 .
we have also the important relations between the tensor @xmath140 and @xmath142 : @xmath148 now if we write @xmath149 and introduce the relation @xmath150 with @xmath151 the free mode given by eq .  [ 120 ] and @xmath152 the source field , induced by @xmath153 , which is given by @xmath154 we get @xmath155 , i.e. , eq .  [ rehh ] as it could be checked directly after comparing eq .
[ s ] with eqs .
[ gper ] and [ gpar ] .
others important relations between the dyadic formalism and scalar green function are given in appendix d. + importantly , we can write all scattered field as a function of the rising and lowering operators @xmath156 , @xmath157 . in order to give explicit expressions we use the fourier transform notations (
i.e. , with @xmath80 with @xmath158 ) and the relation  @xcite @xmath159\nonumber\\ \label{36}\end{aligned}\ ] ] we obtain : @xmath160 @xmath161where @xmath162 is a lowering operator associated with the transverse fluctuating field and defined as @xmath163 such that from eq .  [ 33 ] we get the mode commutator @xmath164 and the harmonic time evolution @xmath165 if we impose the initial condition @xmath166 .
+ for the longitudinal electric field we deduce from eq .  [ gpar ] and eq .  [ cool2 ] @xmath167 ( in agreement with the definition @xmath168 ) and therefore : @xmath169 we have @xmath170 and the commutator @xmath171=\delta_{\alpha,\beta}\delta_{j , k}\delta(\omega-\omega')$ ] and the time evolution @xmath172 with similar initial condition as for the transverse field . regrouping these definition we have obviously @xmath173 furthermore , we can easily show that we have also @xmath174 leading to @xmath175 the description of the scattered field @xmath90 given here corresponds exactly to what huttner and barnett  @xcite called the quantized field obtained after generalizing the diagonalization procedure of fano and hopfield@xcite . here
we justify these modes by using the laplace transform method and by taking the limit @xmath176 explicitly .
this means that we neglect the contribution of the @xmath88 transverse field which is infinitely damped at time @xmath75 .
importantly @xmath30 does nt vanish since the time evolution of @xmath177 in eq .
[ 35 ] is harmonic .
it is important to further comment about causality and on the structure of the total field as a sum of @xmath88 and @xmath90 modes .
the @xmath88 ( classical polariton ) modes are indeed exponentially damped in the future direction meaning that a privileged temporal direction apparently holds in this model .
this would mean that we somehow break the time symmetry of the problem .
however , since the evolution equations are fundamentally time symmetric this should clearly not be possible .
similarly , propagators such as @xmath142 are also spatially damped at large distance , see eq .
[ 103 ] , since we have terms like @xmath178 .
this also seems to imply a privileged time direction and would lead to a kind of paradox .
however , we should remind that only the sum @xmath88 + @xmath90 has a physical meaning and this sum must preserves time symmetry . indeed , we remind that time reversal applied to electrodynamics implies that if @xmath179 , @xmath180 , and @xmath181 is a solution of the coupled set of equations given in section ii then the time reversed solutions  @xcite @xmath182 , @xmath183 , and @xmath184 is also defining a solution of the same equations ( we have also @xmath185 and @xmath186 ) .
now , considering the dipole density evolution we get from eq .  [ 18 ] after some manipulations : @xmath187 where @xmath188 is defined as @xmath38 ( see the definition eq .
[ 35 ] ) but with @xmath189 replaced by @xmath190 .
the presence of the time @xmath191 everywhere has a clear meaning . indeed , from special relativity choosing a time reference frame with @xmath192 ( passive time reversal transformation )
implies that the causal evolution of @xmath39 defined for @xmath72 will become an anticausal evolution defined for @xmath193 .
going back to the active time reversal transformation eq .
[ 18bis ] we see that the new linear susceptibility @xmath194 is given by @xmath195 ( @xmath196 is explicitly written in order to emphasize the anticausal structure .
however , since we have @xmath197 and @xmath198 we have @xmath199 .
this means that the new permittivity ( with poles in the upper half complex frequency space ) is now associated with growing anticausal modes since @xmath200 .
the ( active ) time reversed evolution is defined for @xmath201 so that we indeed get modes decaying into the past direction while growing into the future direction .
this becomes even more clear for the time reversal evolution of the electromagnetic field given by the separation in @xmath88 and @xmath90 modes .
the time reversal applied on the @xmath88 field such as @xmath202 corresponding to classical polaritons is now involving frequency @xmath203 instead of @xmath109 .
this leads to reversed temporal evolution such as @xmath204 and @xmath205 associated with growing waves in the future direction ( since the new poles are now in the upper half complex frequency space ) .
more generally , we have shown ( see appendix c ) that the full evolution of either @xmath88 or @xmath90 fields is completely defined by the knowledge of the green function and propagators such as @xmath206 ( see eq .  [ 106 ] ) with the causal function @xmath93 given by the bromwich fourier integral @xmath207 .
now , like for the susceptibility @xmath208 time reversal leads to a new propagator @xmath209 and therefore by a reasoning equivalent to the previous one to @xmath210 involving the complex conjugate @xmath211 with a fourier expansion @xmath212 which again involves the anticausal permittivity @xmath213 .
this naturally leads to growing waves in the future direction and to green function spatially growing as@xmath214 .
the full equivalence between the two representation of the total field @xmath215 is completed if first we observe that the initial conditions at @xmath29 ( i.e. , @xmath216 , @xmath217 , etc ... ) are now replaced by final boundary condition at @xmath218 ( i.e. , @xmath219 , @xmath220 , etc ... ) .
second , since the @xmath191 value is arbitrary we can send it into the remote future if we want and we will have thus a evolution expressed in term of growing modes for all times @xmath221 . the value of the field at such a boundary is of course arbitrary , so that if we want the two representation can describe the same field if for the final field at @xmath222 we take the field evolving from @xmath29 using the usual causal evolution from past to future .
this equivalence is of course reminiscent from the dual representations obtained using either retarded or advanced waves  @xcite . indeed
, the total electric field @xmath223 can always be separated into @xmath224 or equivalently @xmath225 where @xmath226 and @xmath227 label the retarded and advanced source fields respectively and @xmath228 and @xmath229 label the homogeneous ` free ' fields coming from the past and from the future respectively .
this implies that only a specific choice of boundary conditions in the past or future can lead to a completely causal evolution and therefore time symmetry in not broken in the evolution equations but only through a specification of the boundary conditions . in other worlds , in agreement with the famous loschmidt and poincar objections to boltzmann , strictly deriving time irreversibility from an intrinsically time reversible dynamics is obviously impossible without additional postulates .
this point was fully recognized already by boltzmann long ago and was the basis for his statistical interpretation of the second law of thermodynamics  @xcite . +      in order to further understand the implication of the huttner - barnett model  @xcite we should discuss how the full hamiltionan finally reads in this formalism .
this is central since the langevin noise equations developed by gruner and welsch  @xcite use only the @xmath230 hamitonian . in the huttner - barnett model the full dynamics is determined by the complete knowledge of the dipole density @xmath231 so that the results of gruner and welsch  @xcite should be in principle justifiable .
however , if we are not careful , this will ultimately break unitary and time - symmetry . in order to understand the physical mechanism at work one should first clarify the relation existing between the hutner - barnett model , using @xmath231 as a fundamental field , and the historical hopfield - fano approach  @xcite for defining discrete polariton modes as normal coordinate solutions of the full hamiltonian .
+ we remind that the historical method for dealing with polariton is indeed based on the pioneer work by fano and hopfield  @xcite for diagonalizing the full hamiltonian .
the procedure is actually reminiscent of the classical problem of finding normal coordinates and normal ( real valued ) eigen frequencies associated with free vibrations of a system of linearly coupled harmonic oscillators .
the classical diagonalization method  @xcite relies on the resolution of secular equations already studied by laplace .
actually , the first ` semiclassical ' treatment made by born and huang  @xcite is mathematically correct and equivalent to the one made later by fano and hopfield even though the relation between those formalisms is somehow hidden behind the mathematical symbols .
the full strategy for finding normal coordinates and frequencies becomes clear if we use fourier transforms of the various fields for the problem under study .
indeed , a fourier expansion of a field component @xmath232 will obviously define the needed harmonic expansion . in the problems
considered by born , huang , fano , and hopfield , the fourier spectrum @xmath233 is a sum of dirac distributions @xmath234 peaked on the real valued eigenvibrations @xmath235 .
this specific situation needs a complete discussion since the hopfield - fano model  @xcite leads to an exact diagonalization of the full hamiltonian @xmath52 .
this will in turn makes clear some fundamental relations with the laplace transform formalism used in the previous subsections .
+ we start with the fourier transformed equations @xmath236 @xmath237 and @xmath238 with the constraint @xmath239 , @xmath240 coming from the real valued nature of the fields . from eq .
[ b ] we get using the properties of distributions : @xmath241\sqrt{\frac{2\sigma_\omega}{\pi}}\widetilde{\textbf{e}}(\omega)+\widetilde{\textbf{x}_\omega}^{(sym)}(\omega)\label{d}\end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath242\nonumber\\ \label{e}\end{aligned}\ ] ] and where we used the reality constraint and introduced constants of motions @xmath243 , @xmath244 which will becomes annihilation and creation operators in the second quantized formalism .
the principal value can be conveniently written @xmath245=\frac{1}{\omega^2-(\omega+i0^+)^2}-\frac{i\pi}{2\omega}[\delta(\omega-\omega)-\delta(\omega+\omega)]$ ] or equivalently @xmath245=\frac{1}{\omega^2-(\omega - i0^+)^2}+\frac{i\pi}{2\omega}[\delta(\omega-\omega)-\delta(\omega+\omega)]$ ] .
this leads to two different representations of eq .
[ d ] : @xmath246 where @xmath247 and @xmath248 can also be written like eq .
[ e ] , i.e. , respectively as @xmath249 $ ] or @xmath250 $ ] .
this discussion is reminiscent of the different representation given in section iii d involving retarded , advanced or time symmetric modes .
of course the usual causal representation is @xmath251 which is obtained from the definition of @xmath252 given in section iii at the limit @xmath133 .
however , all the descriptions are rigorously equivalent .
it is also easy to show that we have @xmath253 which justifies why we called this field symmetrical .
it corresponds to a representation of the problem mixing boundary conditions in the future and the past in a symmetrical way like it was used for instance by feynman and wheeler in their description of electrodynamics  @xcite as discussed in section iii d. + now after inserting the causal representation of eq .
[ f ] in eq .
[ c ] and then into eq .
[ a ] we get @xmath254 with @xmath255 and @xmath256 this causal permittivity @xmath257 being given by the huttner - barnett model @xcite the secular equations @xmath258 for transverse modes have no root in the upper complex frequency half - plane and in particular on the real frequency axis ( the longitudinal term is discussed below ) .
this means that , unlike eq .
[ d ] , eq .
[ g ] has in general no dirac term corresponding to independent eigenmodes .
the electric field is thus represented by a source term @xmath259 obtained like in the previous subsection using a causal green function .
the absence of free normal modes for the electric field is of course reminiscent from the rapid decay of the free modes @xmath88 when @xmath133 as discussed before .
the representation given here does nt distinguish between transverse and longitudinal fields but this should naturally occur since we have the constraint @xmath260 which implies @xmath261 . together with eq .  [
a ] we thus get @xmath262 eq .  [ long ] is actually reminiscent of the charge screening by @xmath257 . here
we used the fact that @xmath257 has no root on the real axis otherwise the imaginary part of the permittivity should vanish and the the medium would be lossless at the frequency @xmath263 a fact which is prohibited by physical consideration about irreversibility  @xcite .
this reasoning is rigorously not valid at @xmath264 since the imaginary part of the permittivity is a odd function on the real axis .
but then in general to have a root at @xmath264 it would require that the real part of the permittivity vanishes as well and this is not allowed from usual permittivity model ( see eq .
[ b4 ] ) which makes therefore this possibility very improbable .
+ the previous reasoning is clearly formally equivalent to the ones obtained in the previous subsection and in both case the field @xmath265 or @xmath231 completely determine the electromagnetic evolution .
still , there are exceptions for instance in the drude lorentz model with @xmath266 which forms the basis for the hopfield  @xcite polariton model .
this model is rigorously not completely lossless since we have @xmath267+\frac{i\pi\omega_p^2}{2\omega_0}(\delta(\omega-\omega_0)-\delta(\omega+\omega_0))$ ] corresponding to a singular absorption peak .
+ moreover , in this hopfield model  @xcite , which is a limit case of the huttner barnett model  @xcite , we get the exact evolution equation @xmath268 which in the case of the longitudinal modes leads to solving the secular equation @xmath269 .
it has the solution @xmath270 where @xmath271 isthe longitudinal plasmon frequency . however relating this result to eq .
[ long ] requires careful calculations since @xmath257 is here a highly singular distribution . indeed , applying eq .
[ long ] will lead to find solutions of @xmath272 with @xmath273 with @xmath274 a longitudinal vector field .
this singular @xmath251 field at @xmath275 seems to imply that polaritons are resonant at such frequency in contradiction with the result leading to @xmath276 for such polariton modes .
now , due to the presence of absorption peaks at @xmath275 we have near this singular points @xmath277 where @xmath278 is supposed to be regular  @xcite .
moreover , outside this narrow absorption band the medium is effectively lossless and instead of eq .
[ long ] we have @xmath279 which has the singular solution @xmath280 with @xmath281 a longitudinal vector field .
importantly , from the hypothesis of regularity at @xmath282 we have @xmath283 and therefore @xmath284 which means that @xmath285 everywhere .
the lorentz - drude model leads therefore to genuine longitudinal polaritons eigenfrequencies @xmath286 solutions of @xmath287 .
we emphasize that the same result could be obtained using the laplace transform method .
we have indeed @xmath288 with @xmath289 .
therefore we can rewrite the longitudinal scattered field as @xmath290 .
moreover since there is no longitudinal @xmath88 electric field and since @xmath291 we have @xmath292 which shows that the genuine longitudinal polariton oscillates at the frequency @xmath293 as expected .
+ the transverse polariton modes of the hopfield model are obtained in a similar way from eq .
[ g ] with @xmath294 with @xmath295 a transverse vector field .
as explained in the appendix g solving the problem with a plane wave expansion labeled by @xmath63 and @xmath130 leads again to a secular equation @xmath296 for the two transverse modes ( @xmath297 ) giving a quartic dispersion relation @xmath298 with two usual hopfield solutions @xmath299}}{\sqrt{2}}.\nonumber\\ \end{aligned}\ ] ] the two - modes field have now the structure @xmath300 with @xmath301 with @xmath302 an amplitude coefficient for the mode ( see appendix e and @xcite for a derivation ) .
+ one of the most important issue in the context of the hopfield model concerns the hamiltonian . indeed , in this model the full hamiltonian eq .
[ 10 ] @xmath303 reads @xmath304.\label{polaritonhopfield}\end{aligned}\ ] ] if we isolate first the longitudinal term we get @xmath305\nonumber\\=\int d^3\mathbf{x}[\frac{(\partial_t\mathbf{p}_{||})^2+\omega_l^2\mathbf{p}_{||}^2}{2\omega_p^2}]=2\frac{\omega_l^2}{\omega_p^2}\int d^3\mathbf{x}\boldsymbol{\beta}^\ast\boldsymbol{\beta}\end{aligned}\ ] ] we can of course introduce a fourier transform of the dipole field as @xmath306 and new polariton fields amplitudes @xmath307 .
we thus have @xmath308 .
this expression of the hamiltonian is standard for normal coordinates expansion in linearly coupled harmonic oscillators .
+ furthermore , using commutators like eq .  [ 33 ] one deduce @xmath309=i\hbar\delta^3(\mathbf{x}'-\mathbf{x})\textbf{i}$ ] and other similar ones . in the fourier space
we thus obtain @xmath310=i\hbar\delta_{\alpha,\beta}$ ] which lead after straightforward transformation to the commutators @xmath311=\delta_{\alpha,\beta}$ ] , @xmath312=[f_{\alpha,||}^\dagger(t),f_{\beta,||}^\dagger(t)]=0.$ ] with @xmath313 ( the time dependence in the heisenberg picture means @xmath314 ) .
this naturally leads to the hopfield - fano hamiltonian expansion for longitudinal polaritons : @xmath315 a similar analysis can be handled for the transverse polaritons modes but the calculation is a bit longer ( see appendix e ) . to summarize this calculation in few words : using a fourier expansion of the different primary transverse field operators in eq .
[ polaritonhopfield ] we get after some manipulations the hopfield - fano expansion  @xcite @xmath316 with the operator @xmath317 obeying the usual commutation rules for rising and lowering operators .
again this result is expected in a modal expansion using normal coordinates and again the same result could be alternatively obtained using the laplace transform method .
to summarize , the approach developed previously using the laplace transform formalism agrees with the normal coordinates methods based on the fourier expansion in the frequency domain .
both approaches lead to the conclusion that for an homogeneous medium the various electromagnetic and material fields are completely determined by the knowledge of the matter oscillating dipole density @xmath318 ( fourier s method ) or @xmath231 ( laplace s method ) . in the limit @xmath133
both approach are equivalent and there is no contribution of the free field in a homogenous dissipative medium ( the residual @xmath319,@xmath320 is exponentially damped in the regime @xmath133 ) .
we also showed that if losses in the huttner barnett model are sharply confined in the frequency domain we can find exact polaritonic modes which agree with the historical method developed by fano and hopfield  @xcite .
these modes fully diagonalize the hamitonian @xmath52 .
while we focused our study on the particular drude lorentz model the result is actually generalizable  @xcite to homogenous media with conductivity @xmath321 which lead to a permittivity @xmath322+i\frac{\sigma(\omega)}{\omega}.\label{dangerous}\end{aligned}\ ] ] in particular the hamiltonian can in these special cases be written as a sum of harmonic oscillator terms corresponding to the different longitudinal and transversal polariton modes .
we thus write @xmath323 and @xmath324 where @xmath131 and @xmath325 label the discrete longitudinal and transverse polaritons modes . however , for a more general huttner - barnett model where the permittivity is only constrained by kramers - kronig relations such a simple interpretation is not possible and the hamiltonian is not fully diagonalized .
the additional physical requirement  @xcite imposing that the imaginary part of the permittivity should be rigorously positive valued , i.e. , @xmath326 , also prohibits these exceptional cases which should therefore only appear as ideal limits with loss confined in infinitely narrow absorption bands .
however as we will show in the next subsection the lossless idealization represents a good approximation for a quite general class of medium with weak dissipation .
the previous results of hopfield and fano have still a physical meaning and are for example used with success for the description of planar cavity polaritons  @xcite . +      it is particularly relevant to consider what happens in the huttner barnett approach if we relax a bit the demanding constraints of the original hopfield - fano model based on eq .
[ dangerous ] .
for this we consider a medium with low loss such as the medium can be considered with a good approximation as transparent in a given spectral band where the field is supposed to be limited .
this approach was introduced by milonni  @xcite and is based on the hamiltonian obtained long ago by brillouin  @xcite and later by landau and lifschitz  @xcite for dispersive but slowly absorbing media .
the main idea is to replace the electromagnetic energy density @xmath327 in the full hamiltonian by a term like @xmath328 where @xmath329 is the approximately real valued permittivity of the field at the central pulsation @xmath330 with which the wave - packet propagates . since this approach has been successfully applied to quantize polaritons  @xcite or surface plasmons  @xcite it is particularly interesting to justify it in the context of the more rigorous huttner - barnett approach developed here . in the mean time
this will justify the use of hopfield - fano approach as an effective method applicable for the low loss regime which is a good assumption in most dielectric ( excluding metals supporting lossy plasmon modes ) . + from poynting s theorem , it is usual in macroscopic electromagnetism to isolate the work density @xmath331 such as the energy conservation reads @xmath332 by direct integration we thus get the usual formula for the time derivative of the total energy @xmath333 such as : @xmath334 which cancels if the fields decay sufficiently at spatial infinity ( assumption which will be done in the following ) as it can be proven after using the poynting vector divergence and stokes theorem .
we now consider a temporal integration window @xmath335 to compute the average derivative @xmath336 where @xmath337 means the magnetic energy variation during the time @xmath335 and @xmath338=\int_{t}^{t+\delta t}dt'[ ... ]$ ] is an integration domain from an initial time @xmath75 to a final time @xmath339 .
the next step is to fourier expand the field in the frequency domain and we write @xmath340 where the positive frequency part of the field is defined as @xmath341 ( the negative frequency part is then @xmath342^\dagger$ ] ) .
we use similar notation for the displacement field and we introduce the fourier field @xmath343 . in order to achieve the integration eq .
[ energybri ] the temporal window will be supposed sufficiently large compared to the typical period @xmath344 of the light pulse .
this allows us to simplify the calculation and most contributions cancel out during the integration  @xcite . additionally to perform the calculation
we assume that we have @xmath345 .
this is a usual formula in classical physics where the term @xmath346 is supposed equal to zero , but here we are dealing with a quantized theory and we can not omit this term . furthermore
, we showed that in the huttner - barnett model when @xmath133 only the @xmath90 contributions discussed in section iii c remain  @xcite . assuming therefore this regime the transverse field @xmath347 , and @xmath348 are fully expressed as a function of operators @xmath162 .
[ rehhd ] and [ rehhe ] allow us to define the fourier fields : @xmath349 @xmath350 for @xmath351 ( for @xmath352 we have @xmath353 where @xmath354 is given by eq .  [ glopglop ] at the positive frequency @xmath355 .
similar symmetries and properties hold for the electric and magnetic fields ) .
we thus see that the relation @xmath356 is approximately fulfilled if we consider only frequencies near a resonance at @xmath357 ( the spectral distribution in eq .
[ glopglop ] is thus extremely peaked since losses are weak ) .
this dispersion relation occurs for transverse polaritons modes @xmath358 ( neglecting the imaginary part ) and if the wave packet of spectral extension @xmath359 is centered on such a wavelength we can replace with a good approximation @xmath360 by @xmath361 in the numerator of eq .
[ glopglop ] leading thus to @xmath356 . after this assumption
the calculation can be done like in classical textbooks  @xcite and eq .
[ energybri ] becomes ( this usual calculation will not be repeated here ) : @xmath362)=0 , \nonumber\\ \label{energytri}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath330 denotes now the transverse polariton frequency @xmath363 $ ] for the homogeneous medium considered here . in this formula the imaginary part of @xmath329
is systematically neglected in agreement with the reasoning discussed for instance in ref .
alternatively eq .  [ energytri ] could be rewritten using the time average @xmath364 in order to get the classical brillouin formula for the electric energy density in the medium but this will not be useful here .
moreover , we introduce the mode operators : @xmath365 where @xmath366 is a frequency window centered on the polariton pulsation @xmath363:=\omega'_{\alpha , m}$ ] .
now , if we suppose that the electromagnetic field is given by a sum of such transverse modes ( without overlap of the frequency domains @xmath366 ) then eq .
[ energytri ] reads : @xmath367e_{\alpha , j , m}^{(-)}e_{\alpha , j , m}^{(+)})=0 , \label{energyquadri}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where the contribution @xmath368 arises from a modal expansion of the magnetic field and from using the resonance condition in the numerator of eq .
[ rehhb ] ( which involves @xmath369 ) .
+ what is also fundamental here is that we have the commutators ( the derivation in the complex plane in given in appendix f ) : @xmath370=\delta_{\alpha,\beta}\delta_{j , l}\delta_{m , n}\frac{\hbar\omega_{\alpha , m}}{2}\frac{d\omega_{\alpha , m}^2}{d\omega_\alpha^2}.\nonumber\\ \label{window}\end{aligned}\ ] ] and @xmath371=[e_{\alpha , j , m}^{(-)}(t),e_{\beta , l , n}^{(-)}(t)]=0 $ ] .
these relation imply the existence of effective rising and lowering operators @xmath372 for polaritons defined by @xmath373 .
+ these relations were phenomenologically obtained by milonni  @xcite after quantizing brillouin s energy formula .
here we justify this result from the ground using the huttner - barnett formalism .
importantly , after defining the optical index of the polariton mode @xmath374 we can rewrite @xmath375 as @xmath376 where @xmath377 is the group velocity of the mode defined by @xmath378 .
this allows us to rewrite the operators as @xmath379 ( since @xmath380 ) and finally to have : @xmath381 the total energy is thus defined as @xmath382 which is a constant of motion defined up to an arbitrary additive constant .
this formula involves only the transverse modes so that actually it gives the energy @xmath383 associated with the transverse polariton modes in weekly dissipative medium and represents a generalization of hopfield - fano results as an effective but approximative model . +
few remarks are here necessary .
first , the model proposed here relies on the assumption that the fields is a sum of wave packets spectrally non overlapping .
this hypothesis which was also made by garrison and chio  @xcite was then called the ` quasi multimonochromatic ' approximation .
this assumption is certainly not necessary since milonni s model includes as a limit the rigorous hopfield- fano model  @xcite which does nt rely on such an assumption . in order to justify further milonni s approach  @xcite and relax the hypothesis
made it is enough to observe first , that in eq .
[ glopglop ] the approximation @xmath356 is quite robust even if the fields is spectrally very broad . indeed , since losses are here supposed to be very weak the resonance will practically cancel out if @xmath14 differs significantly of a values where the condition @xmath357 occurs .
second , if we insert formally eqs .
[ glopglop ] and eq .
[ reglop ] with the previous assumption into eq .
[ energytri ] then instead of the term @xmath384 in eq .
[ energytri ] we get a term @xmath385 .
this contribution is in general more complicated because @xmath386 depends on @xmath14 .
however , using explicitly eqs .
[ glopglop ] and eq .
[ reglop ] and specially the fourier expansion in plane waves we see that for the specific fields considered here eq .
[ energyquadri ] still holds .
this means that we can again introduce polariton operators @xmath387 , and @xmath388 defined by eq .
[ modepolar ] .
as previously these operators depend on a frequency window @xmath366 and here these are introduced quite formally for taking into account the fact that the resonance @xmath389 is extremely peaked near the different polariton frequencies @xmath390 .
a product like @xmath391 occurring in the integration will thus not contribute unless the frequency @xmath392 and @xmath14 are in a given window @xmath366 .
[ energyquadri ] thus results as a very good practical approximation .
+ remarkably , as observed in eq .
[ window ] ( and explained in appendix e ) the commutator does not depend explicitly on the size of these windows ( which are only supposed to be small compared to the separation between the different mode frequencies and large enough to include the resonance peaks as explained in appendix e ) .
therefore , this allows us to renormalize these operators as before by introducing the same rising and lowering polariton operators @xmath393 such as eq .
[ energy5 ] and @xmath394 hold identically .
we thus have completed the justification of the milonni s approach for dielectric medium with weak absorption  @xcite . +
an other remark concerns the longitudinal electric field which was omitted here since it does not play an active role in pulse propagation through the medium .
we have indeed @xmath395 so that the reasoning was only done on the transverse modes . however , this was not necessary and one could have kept the longitudinal electric field all along the reasoning . since
the transverse part is a constant as we showed before , this should be the case for the longitudinal part as well since @xmath396 is also an integral of motion .
now , a reasoning similar to the previous one for transverse waves will lead to the brillouin formula for the longitudinal electric energy : @xmath397 where the longitudinal polariton modes are defined by : @xmath398 in this formalism the longitudinal polariton frequencies @xmath399 are the solutions of @xmath400 ( where losses are again supposed to be weak ) .
the commutator can be defined using a method equivalent to eq .  [ window ]
and we get : @xmath401=\delta_{\alpha,\beta}\delta_{m , n}\frac{\hbar}{|m_{\alpha , m}|}. \label{windowlong}\end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath402 . after defining the lowering polariton operator as @xmath403
we thus obtain : @xmath404 as it should be .
s approach  @xcite leads therefore to an effective justification of longitudinal polaritons as well and this includes the hopfield - fano  @xcite model as a limiting case when losses are vanishing outside infinitely narrow absorption bands . +
a final important remark should be done since it concerns the general significance of the scattered field ( s ) in the lossless limit .
indeed , we see from eq .
[ modepolar ] that the transverse mode operators @xmath405 and @xmath405 rigorously vanish in the limit @xmath406 ( this is not true for longitudinal operators
.  [ modepolarlong ] which are physically linked to bound and coulombian fields ) . in agreement with the sub - section iii
c we thus conclude that in the vacuum limit one should consider the @xmath88 fields as the only surviving contribution .
however , we also see that for all practical needs if the losses are weak but not equal to zero then by imposing @xmath407 the @xmath88 terms should cancel and only will survive a scattered term which will formally looks as a free photon in a bulk medium with optical index @xmath408 .
therefore , we justify the formal canonical quantization procedure used by milonni and others  @xcite which reduces to the historical quantization methods in the ( quasi- ) non dispersive limit  @xcite .
however , this can only be considered as an approximation and therefore the original claim presented in ref .
@xcite that the scattered field @xmath90 is sufficient for justifying the exact limit @xmath406 without the @xmath88 term was actually unfounded . as we will see
this will become specially relevant when we will generalize the langevin noise approach to an inhomogeneous medium .
the central issue in this work is to interpret the physical meaning of quantized polariton modes in the general huttner barnett framework of section ii and this will go far beyond the limiting hopfield - fano  @xcite or milonni s approaches  @xcite which are valid in restricted conditions when losses and/or dispersion are weak enough . for the present purpose we will focus on the homogeneous medium case ( the most general inhomogeneous medium case is analyzed in the next section ) .
it is fundamental to compare the mode structure of eqs .
[ rehhd ] , [ rehhe ] , [ rehhepar ] , and [ rehhb ] on the one side and the mode structure of eqs .
[ 118 ] , [ 119 ] and [ 120 ] on the other side which are associated respectively with the free modes ` ( 0 ) ' and the scattered modes ` ( s ) ' .
the ` ( 0 ) ' modes are the eigenstates of the classical propagation problem when we can cancel the fluctuating term @xmath38 .
this is however not allowed in qed since we are now considering operators in the hilbert space and one can not omit these terms without breaking unitarity .
inversely the scattered modes are the modes which were considered by huttner and barnett  @xcite .
moreover only these ` ( s ) ' modes survive here if the initial time @xmath29 is sent into the remote past , i.e. , if @xmath407 . for all operational needs
it is therefore justified to omit altogether the ` ( 0 ) ' mode contribution in the homogeneous medium case . clearly , this was the choice made by gruner and welsch  @xcite and later by more or less all authors working on the subject ( see however refs .
@xcite ) which accepted this rule even for non - homogeneous media .
if we accept this axiom then the hamiltonian of the problem seems to reduce to @xmath409 , i.e. in the homogeneous medium case , to @xmath410 which depends only on the fluctuating operators @xmath411 , @xmath412 in agreement with the langevin force / noise approach of gruner and welsch  @xcite .
+ now , there is apparently a paradox : the complete hamiltonian of the system is in agreement with eq .
[ 10 ] given by @xmath413 can we show that @xmath52 is actually equivalent to @xmath230 ?
this is indeed the case for all practical purposes at least for the homogeneous medium case treated by huttner and barnett@xcite that we analyzed in details before . to see that remember that @xmath52 is actually a constant of motion
therefore we should have @xmath414 .
this equality reads also @xmath415 .
now , the central point here is to use the boundary condition at time @xmath29 which imply @xmath416 .
furthermore , since the time evolution of @xmath417 is harmonic we have @xmath418 .
altogether these relations imply @xmath419 so that we have : @xmath420 in other words we get a description in which the fock number states associated with the fluctuating operators @xmath177 or equivalently @xmath162 , @xmath411 diagonalize not the full hamiltonian but only a part that we noted @xmath230 . however , this is not problematic since the remaining term @xmath421 is also clearly by definition a constant of motion since it only depends on fields at time @xmath29 .
how can we interpret this constant of motion ?
we can clearly rewrite it as @xmath422 .
therefore , in the @xmath423 potential vector formalism defined in section ii , this constant depends on both @xmath424 and @xmath425 , i.  e. , lowering and rising operators associated with the transverse @xmath426 and @xmath427 fields , and it also depends on the operators @xmath428 , @xmath429 which are associated with the fluctuating dipole distribution at the initial time @xmath29 . furthermore since we have also @xmath430 , @xmath431 , @xmath432 and since @xmath433 , @xmath434 we can alternatively write : @xmath435 this means that the remaining term @xmath436 depends on the knowledge of @xmath437 and @xmath438 electromagnetic free field .
since in the limit @xmath133 these @xmath88 electromagnetic terms vanish at any finite time @xmath75 this would justify to consider @xmath436 as an inoperative constant .
however , we have also the contribution of @xmath439 which play a fundamental role in the determination of @xmath440 , @xmath441 and @xmath442 at the finite time @xmath75 . therefore , while @xmath436 is a constant of motion it nevertheless contains quantities which will affect the evolution of the surviving @xmath90 fields at time @xmath75 .
it is for this reason that we can say that for ` all practical purposes only ' @xmath436 is unnecessary and that @xmath230 is sufficient for describing the energy problem .
+ there are however many remarks to be done here concerning this analysis .
first , while the hamiltonian @xmath230 gives a good view of the energy up to an additive inoperative constant it is the full hamiltonian which is necessary for deriving the equations of motions from hamilton s equations or equivalently from heisenberg s evolution like @xmath443 $ ] .
it is also only with @xmath52 that time symmetry is fully preserved . in particular
do not forget that in deriving the fano - hopfield  @xcite formalism we introduced ( see eq .
[ g ] ) the evolution @xmath444 which depends on the causal ` in ' field @xmath445 and on the causal permittivity @xmath257 . since the knowledge of @xmath446 is equivalent to @xmath91 in the limit @xmath447 the ( forward ) laplace transform method is leading to the same result that the usual fano method and this fits as well with the gruner and welsch langevin s equations  @xcite .
however , instead of eq .  [ g ]
we could equivalently use the anticausal equation @xmath448 where @xmath449 replaces @xmath449 and where the causal permittivity @xmath257 becomes now @xmath450 which is associated with amplification instead of the usual dissipation .
the green integral equation now becomes @xmath451 where @xmath208 replaces @xmath452 ( see eq .
[ 20bis ] ) and is associated with the anticausal dynamics which is connected to the time - reversed evolution . both formalism developed with either ` in ' or ` out ' fields
are completely equivalent but this shows that we have the freedom to express the scattered field in term of @xmath453 , and @xmath454 or in term of @xmath455 , and @xmath456 . since there is in general no fully propagative ` free ' electromagnetic modes ( if we exclude the lossless medium limit considered by hopfield and fano  @xcite ) then the surviving fields at finite time @xmath75 obtained either with @xmath133 or @xmath457 correspond to decaying or growing waves in agreement with the results discussed for the laplace transform methods .
the full hamiltonian @xmath52 is thus expressed equivalently either as @xmath458 ( with @xmath459 the fluctuating field defined in section ii ) or as @xmath460 with @xmath461 the fluctuating field using using a final boundary condition at time @xmath222 . in the limits
@xmath133 , @xmath457 this leads to @xmath462 or @xmath463 where the remaining terms ( see eq .
[ rema ] ) @xmath464 and @xmath465 are two different integrals of motion .
therefore , it shows that the representation chosen by gruner and welsch in ref .
@xcite is not univocal and that one could reformulate all the theory in terms of @xmath449 instead of @xmath445 to respect time symmetry .
furthermore , we emphasize that while the two hamiltonians @xmath466 and @xmath467 have formally the same mathematical structure they are not associated with the same physical electromagnetic fields since eq .  [ glopiglopa ] and eq .
[ outoftime ] corresponds respectively to decaying and growing radiated fields .
causality therefore requires to make a choice between two different representations .
it is only the choice on a boundary condition in the remote past or future together with thermodynamical considerations which allow us to favor the decaying regime given by eq .
[ glopiglopa ] .
+ a different but related point to be discussed here concerns the hopfield - fano limit  @xcite for which the general conductivity like @xmath468 leads to quasi - lossless permittivity ( see eq .
[ dangerous ] ) . in this regime
we found that an exact diagonalization procedure can be handled out leading to genuine transverse and longitudinal polaritons .
these exceptions also fit with the time - symmetry considerations discussed previously since the quasi - absence of absorption makes the problem much more time symmetrical that in the cases where the only viable representations involve either @xmath449 or @xmath445 .
of course the hopfield - fano model is an idealization which , in the context of the huttner - barnett framework , gets a clear physical interpretation only as an approximation for low - loss media , as explained in section iii g. + this leads us to a new problem , which is certainly the most important in the present work : considering the vacuum limit @xmath469 discussed after eq .  [ 120 ] we saw that only the @xmath88 electromagnetic modes survive in this regime and that the @xmath90 modes are killed together with @xmath470 . these vacuum modes are completely decoupled from the undamped mechanical oscillators motion @xmath471 . in this limit time symmetry is of course respected and we see that the full set of eigenmodes diagonalizing the hamiltonian corresponds to the uncoupled free photons and free mechanical oscillator motions . an other way to see that is to use again the fourier formalism instead of the laplace transform method . from eq .
[ g ] we see that in the vacuum limit it is not the scattered field defined by eq
.  [ glopiglopa ] which survives ( since @xmath470 ) but an additional term corresponding to free space photon modes .
while this should be clear after our discussion this point has tremendous consequences if we want to generalize properly the huttner - barnett approach to an inhomogeneous medium .
in such a medium the permittivity @xmath472 is position dependent .
now , generally speaking in nanophotonics we consider problems where a dissipative object like a metal particle is confined in a finite region of space surrounded by vacuum .
the susceptibility @xmath42 therefore vanishes outside the object and we expect electromagnetic vacuum modes associated with free space photon to play a important role in the final analysis .
this should contrast with the huttner - barnett case for homogenous medium which supposes an unphysical infinite dissipative medium supporting bulk polaritons or plasmons .
the inhomogeneous polariton case will be treated in the next section .
in order to deal with the most general situation of polaritons in inhomogeneous media we need first to consider the formal separation between source fields and free - space photon mode .
the separation used here is clearly different from the one developed in the previous section since we now consider on the one side as source term the total polarization @xmath473 ( see eq .  [ 18 ] ) which includes both the fluctuating term @xmath30 but also the induced polarization @xmath35 and on the other side as source - free terms some general photon modes solutions of maxwell equations in vacuum . in order not to get confused with the previous notations we now label @xmath474 the vacuum modes and @xmath475 the modes induced by the total dipolar distribution @xmath473 .
+ we start with the second order dynamical equation @xmath476 which can be solved using the method developed for eq .  [ 90 ] . indeed , by imposing @xmath477 in eq .
[ 90 ] and by replacing @xmath38 by @xmath39 , @xmath134 by @xmath478 , @xmath479 by @xmath480 and so on in the calculations of section iii we can easily obtain the formalism needed .
consider first the vacuum fields @xmath478 , @xmath481 and @xmath482 . from eqs .
[ 118 ] , [ 119 ] in the limit @xmath126 we get a plane - wave modal expansion for the free photon field which we write in analogy with eq .  [ 57b ] as @xmath483 with the modal expansion coefficients @xmath484 showing the harmonic structure of the fields .
of course this transverse vacuum field satisfies maxwell s equations without source terms and in particular @xmath485 with @xmath486 .
+ we now study the scattered - fields @xmath487 , @xmath488 and @xmath489 . like for the calculations presented in section iii for the homogeneous medium case it appears convenient to use the green dyadic formalism which is well adapted for nanophotonics studies in particular for numerical computation of fields in complex dielectric environment where no obvious spatial symmetry are visible . starting with this formalism we get for the @xmath475 electric field : @xmath490 equivalently , by using the inverse laplace transform ( see appendix d for details ) @xmath491
, we obtain in the time domain @xmath492 this analysis implies @xmath493 and therefore we have @xmath494 .
+ moreover , most studies consider instead of the propagator @xmath495 the dyadic green function @xmath496 which is a solution of @xmath497 and which is actually connected to @xmath495 by @xmath498 .
this dyadic green function is very convenient since practical calculations very often involve not the displacement field @xmath426 but the electric field @xmath499 .
we obtain : @xmath500 alternatively in the time domain we have for the scattered field @xmath501 : @xmath502 this can rewritten by using the propagator @xmath503 together with eq .  [ definiti ] as : @xmath504 finally , we can also use the dyadic formalism to represent the magnetic field @xmath505 . starting from eq .  [ 6 ] which yields @xmath506 and therefore @xmath507 where we introduced the definition @xmath508 ( here we used the condition @xmath509 ) . in the time domain
we thus directly obtain @xmath510 which yields @xmath511 as expected .
+ we emphasize here once again the fundamental role played by the boundary conditions at @xmath29 .
what we showed is that at the initial time @xmath29 we have @xmath493 and thus @xmath512 which means , by definition of our vacuum modes , @xmath513 . in other words ,
the electric field associated with vacuum modes equals the total displacement fields at the initial time .
this is interesting since it also implies @xmath514 ( which means @xmath515 ) .
this can be written after separation into transverse and longitudinal parts as @xmath516 for the transverse ( solenoidal or divergence- free ) components and @xmath517 for the longitudinal ( irrotational or curl - free ) components .
.  [ gourbi ] is well known in qed since it rigorously agrees with the definition of the longitudinal field obtained in usual coulomb gauge using the @xmath3 potential instead of @xmath423 .
untill now we did nt specify the form of the dipole density @xmath473 .
the separation between source and free terms for the field was therefore analyzed from a microscopic perspective where the diffracted fields @xmath518 and @xmath505 was generated by the full microscopic current . in order to generalize the description given in section iii for the homogeneous medium we will now use the separation eq .  [ 18 ] of @xmath473 into a fluctuating term @xmath30 and an induced contribution @xmath35 of essentially classical origin . using the laplace
transform we get @xmath519 . now from the previous section we have therefore for the laplace transform of the electric field the following lippman - schwinger integral equation @xmath520.\nonumber\\ \label{149}\end{aligned}\ ] ] in order to get a meaningful separation of the total field we here define @xmath521 and @xmath522 we have clearly @xmath523 and @xmath524 this allows us to interpret @xmath142 as the green function of the inhomogeneous dielectric medium while @xmath525 is a free solution of maxwell s equation in the dielectric medium in absence of the fluctuating source @xmath153 . by direct replacement of eqs .
[ 150 ] and [ 151 ] into [ 149 ] one get @xmath526 meaning that the total field can be seen as the sum of the free solution @xmath525 and of scattering contribution @xmath527 induced by the fluctuating source @xmath153 .
+ in the time domain we get for the electric field @xmath528 and for the magnetic field @xmath529 which are completed by the constitutive relation : @xmath530 .
similarly we obtain for the new propagator : @xmath531\nonumber\\ -\int_{0}^{t}d\tau'\chi(\mathbf{x},\tau')\mathbf{u}_\chi(t-\tau',\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x''})\nonumber\\ \label{156}\end{aligned}\ ] ] we have the important properties @xmath532 , @xmath533 .
the total electromagnetic field in the time domain is thus expressed as : @xmath534 @xmath535 with @xmath536 , @xmath537 finally , the constitutive relation for the scattered displacement field @xmath538 reads : @xmath539 .
the boundary conditions at @xmath29 together with the field equations determine the full evolution and we have : @xmath540 we point out that the description of the longitudinal field should be treated independently in this formalism since at any time @xmath75 we have the constraint @xmath541 which shows that fluctuating current and field are not independent .
more precisely , if we insert the constraint @xmath541 into the lagrangian formalism developed in section ii we get a new effective lagrangian density for the longitudinal field which reads : @xmath542 from eq .
[ 2bb ] we get the euler - lagrange equation : @xmath543 with @xmath544 and which agrees with eq .
[ 8 ] if the constraint @xmath541 is used .
now , the formal solution of eq .
[ 8b ] is obtained from eq .
[ 17bb ] @xmath545 and allows for a separation between a fluctuating term @xmath546 and a source term @xmath547 . from this
we naturally deduce @xmath548 integral eqs .
[ 17bb ] or [ dde ] could in principle be solved iteratively in order to find expressions @xmath549 and @xmath550 which are linear functionals of @xmath551 and @xmath552 .
alternatively , this can be done self - consistently using the laplace transform of eq .
[ dde ] which reads @xmath553 and leads to : @xmath554 in the time domain we have thus @xmath555 with the effective susceptibility defined as@xmath556 we have equivalently for the effective susceptibility @xmath557 . after closing the contour in the complex plane
we get @xmath558 where the sum is taken over the longitudinal modes solutions of @xmath559 ( with @xmath560 and @xmath561 by definition ) . the frequencies considered here are in general spatially dependent since the medium is inhomogeneous and are therefore very often difficult to find . in the limit of the homogeneous lossless medium
we obtain the hopfield - fano  @xcite model .
+ we emphasize that the present description of the polariton field contrast with the integral solution of eq .  [ g ] @xmath444 which was obtained for the homogeneous medium : @xmath562 and which included only a scattering contribution @xmath90 due to the cancellation of the @xmath88 term for @xmath133 . here , we can not neglect or cancel the @xmath88 mode solutions since in general the medium is not necessary lossy at spatial infinity .
this will be in particular the case for all scattering problems involving a localized system such as a metal or dielectric antenna supporting plasmon - polariton localized modes .
however , mostly all studies , inspirited by the success of the huttner - barnett model  @xcite for the homogeneous lossy medium , and following the langevin - noise method proposed gruner and welsch  @xcite , neglected or often even completely omitted the contribution of the @xmath88 modes .
still , these @xmath88 modes are crucial for preserving the unitarity of the full matter field dynamics and can not be rigorously omitted . only in those case where absorption is present at infinity we can omit the @xmath88 modes .
+ to clarify this point further consider a medium made of a spatially homogeneous background susceptibility @xmath563 and of a localized susceptibility @xmath564 such as @xmath565 at spatial infinity .
the electromagnetic field propagating into the medium with total permittivity @xmath566 can be thus formally developed using the lippeman - schwinger equation as : @xmath567.\nonumber\\ = \overline{\mathbf{e}'}^{(1)}(\mathbf{x},p ) -\int d^3\mathbf{x ' } \frac{p^2}{c^2}\mathbf{g}_{\chi_1}(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x'},ip)\nonumber\\ \cdot [ \bar{\chi_2}(\mathbf{x}',p)\overline{\mathbf{e}'}(\mathbf{x},p)+\overline{\mathbf{p}'}^{(0)}(\mathbf{x'},p)].\nonumber\\\label{154bb}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we have defined a new background free field @xmath568 and a new green dyadic tensor for the background medium @xmath569 we have naturally @xmath570 and similarly @xmath571 .
+ importantly , in the time domain we can write : @xmath572\nonumber\\ -\mathbf{p}^{(0)}(\mathbf{x},t)+\int_{0}^{t}d\tau\chi_2(\mathbf{x},\tau)\textbf{e}(\mathbf{x},t-\tau).\nonumber\\ \label{15bbb}\end{aligned}\ ] ] we can check that we have @xmath573 .
moreover , since from eq .
[ 150b ] ( written in the time domain ) we have @xmath574 and since @xmath575 , we deduce that at the initial time @xmath29 @xmath576 as it should be to agree with the general formalism presented in section iv a. + now , since the background dissipative medium is not spatially bound the @xmath577 field associated with damped modes will vanish if @xmath133 as explained before .
we could therefore be tempted  @xcite to eliminate from the start @xmath577 and thus get in the laplace transform language the effective formula : @xmath578\nonumber\\   = -\int d^3\mathbf{x ' } \frac{p^2}{c^2}\mathbf{g}_{\chi}(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x'},ip)\cdot\overline{\mathbf{p}'}^{(0)}(\mathbf{x'},p ) ] .
\label{154bbb}\end{aligned}\ ] ] with the total green dyadic function @xmath579 obeying to eq .
[ 152 ] with the total permittivity @xmath566 .
it is straightforward to check that @xmath580 satisfies also eq .
[ 151 ] so that it is the same green function .
+ however , removing @xmath577 from the start in eq .
[ 15bbb ] would mean that the boundary conditions at the initial time @xmath29 have been obliviated since we should now necessarily have @xmath581 .
this corresponds to a very specific boundary condition which is certainly allowed in classical physics ( where we can put @xmath582 ) but which in the quantum formalism means that we break the unitarity of the evolution . to say it differently , it means that in the langevin noise formalism  @xcite the photon field @xmath423 is not anymore an independent canonical contribution to the evolution since all electromagnetic fields are induced by the material part . the green formalism presented by gruner and welsch  @xcite , and abundantly used since  @xcite , represents therefore an alternative theory which rigorously speaking is not equivalent , contrary to the claim in refs .
@xcite , to the lagrangian formalism discussed in section ii for the general huttner - barnett model  @xcite .
our analysis , as already explained in the introduction , agrees with the general studies made in the 1970 s and 1980 s in qed  @xcite since one must include with an equal footings both the field and matter fluctuations in a self consistent qed in order to preserve rigorously unitarity and causality .
+      two issues are important to emphasize here .
first , observe that in the limit where the background susceptibility @xmath583 vanishes then the term @xmath584 in general does not cancel at any time , and therefore the coupling to photonic modes can not be omitted even in practice from the evolution at finite time @xmath75 .
this is is particularly important in nanophotonics where an incident exiting photon field interact with a localized nano - antenna .
it is therefore crucial to analyze further the impact of our findings on the quantum dynamics of polaritons in presence of sources such as quantum fluorescent emitters .
this will the subject of a subsequent article .
+ the second issue concerns the hamiltonian definition in the new formalism .
indeed , the definition of the full system hamiltonian @xmath52 was previously given for the homogeneous medium case in section iii g. we showed ( see eq .
[ 158o ] ) that @xmath52 is given by @xmath585 where @xmath230 is the material hamiltonian defined in eq .
[ 30c ] and which depends only on the free mode operators @xmath156 , @xmath157 .
this @xmath586 is the hamiltonian considered by the noise langevin approach and the remaining term ( see eq .
[ rema ] ) @xmath587 is an additional constant of motion .
this constant proved to be irrelevant for all practical purposes since the only surviving electromagnetic fields ( i.e. if @xmath133 ) are the induced @xmath90 modes which are generated by the fluctuating dipole density @xmath30 ( see however the different remarks concerning time symmetry at the end of section iii g ) .
now , for the inhomogeneous problem the complete reasoning leading to eq .
[ 158ob ] is still rigorously valid .
the main difference being that in general the constant of motion @xmath587 is not irrelevant at all since the @xmath88 electromagnetic modes are not in general vanishing even if @xmath133 . + in order to clarify this point we should now physically interpret the term @xmath436 .
we first start with the less relevant term in optics : the longitudinal polariton .
indeed , the longitudinal field is here decoupled from the rest and evolves independently using the lagrangian density @xmath588 defined in eq .
[ 2bb ] ( this should not be necessarily true if the polaritons are coupled to external sources such as fluorescent emitters ) .
we thus get the following hamiltonian @xmath589:.\nonumber\\ \label{2c}\end{aligned}\ ] ] @xmath590 is a constant of motion and can used ( with the hamiltonian formalism ) to deduce the evolution equation ( see eq .
[ 8b ] ) and the solution eq .  [ 17bb ] . since @xmath590 is a constant of motion we have @xmath591 and from the form of the solution we obtain the equivalent formula @xmath592 .
\label{2d}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we have clearly by definition @xmath593and thus @xmath594 ( with @xmath595 ) .
while @xmath596 is a constant of motion it is not irrelevant here since the equivalence of eq .  [
2c ] and eq .
[ 2d ] leads to the complete solution eq .
[ 17bb ] for @xmath597 .
oppositely , taking @xmath598 and omitting @xmath596 would lead to the free solution @xmath599 in contradiction with the dynamical law .
this again stresses the importance of keeping all contributions in the evolution and hamiltonian . + in order to analyze the transverse field hamiltonian we should comment further on the difference between the description using the @xmath423 potential used in this work and the most traditional treatment using the * a * potential ( in the coulomb gauge ) . indeed , by analogy with the separation between @xmath475 and @xmath474 modes discussed in section vi a we can using the * a * potential vector representation get a separation between free - space modes @xmath600 and source field @xmath601 .
here , we label these modes by an additional prime for reasons which will become clear below . first , the source field contribution @xmath602 is given by @xmath603 and with by definition @xmath604 .
importantly we have @xmath605 meaning also @xmath606 . the free - space modes @xmath607
are easily obtained using a plane wave expansion as @xmath608 where @xmath609 . using the @xmath3 potential we therefore get for the free electromagnetic fields : @xmath610 these transverse fields satisfy maxwell s equation in vacuum like the free - fields given by eq .
[ 121 ] do as well . however , it should now be clear that this two sets of free - fields given either by eq .
[ 140nnn ] or eq .
[ 121 ] are not equivalent . to see that we must express the source field @xmath611 .
the longitudinal contribution @xmath612 is given by the usual instantaneous coulomb field @xmath613 since there is no other longitudinal contribution this leads to @xmath614 which is eq .
[ gourbi ] .
as mentioned already this is the usual result .
however the most important term here is the transverse source field : @xmath615 .
we get for this term @xmath616 which is also written as : @xmath617 equivalently we have in the frequency domain : @xmath618 \nonumber\\ \label{143}\end{aligned}\ ] ] this transverse scattered field vanishes at @xmath29 : @xmath619 and therefore at this initial time it differs by an amount @xmath620 from the scattered field given by eq .
we thus get @xmath621 .
importantly , by comparing eq .
[ 136 ] and eq .
[ 144 ] we obtain a relation for the free - space modes in the two representations using either the @xmath423 or @xmath3 potential vectors : @xmath622 this is reminiscent from the relation @xmath623 .
it shows that while the two fields @xmath624 and @xmath625 are solutions of the same maxwell s equations in vacuum they are not defined by the same initial conditions .
we must therefore be extremely careful when dealing with the modes in order not to get confused with the solutions chosen .
we also mention that the scattered magnetic field @xmath626 is given by @xmath627 or equivalently by @xmath628 in the frequency domain this gives : @xmath629 a comparison with the formulas obtained in the subsection vi a shows that @xmath630 differs from @xmath505 but that at time @xmath29 both vanish so that @xmath631 .
it implies that @xmath632 so that while @xmath633 differs from @xmath634 for @xmath635 they become equal at the initial time @xmath29 .
again , this stresses the difference between the representations based either on @xmath423 or @xmath3 .
+ now , this description using @xmath3 leads to a clear interpretation of @xmath636 .
indeed , at time @xmath29 only the @xmath607 solution survives for the transverse part of the field .
importantly , the set of free - space solutions @xmath607 actually depends on lowering and rising operators @xmath637 , @xmath638 defined such that @xmath639=\delta_{\alpha,\beta}\delta_{j , k}$ ] and @xmath640 with @xmath641 . therefore , by a reasoning similar to the one leading to eq .
[ 158o ] we deduce @xmath642 we clearly here get a physical interpretation of the remaining term @xmath643 as a energy sum over the transverse photon modes propagating in free space .
these free photons are calculated using the @xmath3 potential vector . from eq .
[ 145 ] we know that these modes differ in general from those in the @xmath423 potential vector since @xmath644 is not identical to @xmath645 unless the polarization density @xmath646 cancels ( which is the case in vacuum ) .
+ now , in classical physics the meaning of expansion eq .
[ energytransverse ] is clear : it corresponds to a diagonalization of the hamiltonian in term of normal coordinates , i.e. , like for classical mechanics @xcite , and similarly to the huang , fano , hopfield procedure for polaritons  @xcite . in qed
the problem is different since , as explained in details in ref .
@xcite fields like @xmath647 and @xmath648 ( and their hermitian conjugate variables ) do not commute , unlike it is for @xmath649 and @xmath648 .
it is thus not possible to find common eigenstates of the @xmath650 operators for photons ( in the usual representation ) and for @xmath651 associated with the material fluctuations .
this is not true for the representation using @xmath652 and @xmath651 operators but now the full hamiltonian is not fully diagonalized as seen from eq .
[ 158ob ] . only if one neglect the remaining term @xmath436 , like it was done in refs .
@xcite , can we diagonalize the hamiltonian
. however , then we get the troubles concerning unitarity , causality and time symmetry discussed along this manuscript .
the general formalism discussed in this article using the @xmath423 potential provide a natural way for dealing with qed in dispersive and dissipative media .
it is based on a canonical quantization procedure generalizing the early work of huttner and barnett  @xcite for polaritons in homogeneous media .
the method is unambiguous as far as we conserve all terms associated with free photons @xmath653 and material fluctuations @xmath346 for describing the quantum evolution . in particular , in order to preserve the full unitarity and the time symmetry of the coupled system of equations we have to include in the evolution terms associated with fluctuating electromagnetic modes @xmath319 , @xmath320 which have a classical interpretation as polariton eigenmodes and can not in general be omitted if the medium is spatially localized in vacuum .
we also discussed alternative representation based on the potential @xmath3 instead of @xmath423 . at the end
both representations are clearly equivalent and could be used for generalizing the present theory to other linear media including tensorial anisotropy , magnetic properties , and constitutive equations coupling @xmath654 and @xmath655 ( magneto / electric media ) . moreover
, the most important finding of the present article concerns the comparisons between the generalized huttner - barnett approach , advocated here , which involves both photonic and material independent degrees of freedom , and the langevin - noise method proposed initially by gruner and welsch  @xcite which involves only the material degrees of freedom associated with fluctuating currents .
we showed that rigorously speaking the langevin - noise method is not equivalent to the full hamiltonian qed evolution coupling photonic and material fields . only in the regime where the dissipation of the bulk surrounding medium is non vanishing at spatial infinity could we ,
i.e. , for all practical purposes , identify the two theories .
however , even with such assumptions the langevin noise model is breaking time - symmetry since it considers only decaying modes while the full hamiltonian theory used in our work accepts also growing waves associated with anti - thermodynamic processes .
we claim that this is crucial in nanophotonics / plasmonics where quantum emitters , spatially localized , are coupled to photonic and material modes available in the complex environment , e.g. , near nano - antennas in vacuum ( i.e. in a spatial domain where losses are vanishing at infinity ) . since most studies consider the interaction between molecules or quantum - dots and plasmon / polaritons using the langevin noise approach we think that it is urgent to clarify and clean up the problem by analyzing the coupling regime using the full hamiltonian evolution advocated in the present work . finally , we suggest that this work could impact the interpretation and discussion of pure qed effects such as the casimir force or the lamb shift which are strongly impacted by polariton and plasmon modes . all this will be the subject for future works and therefore the present detailed analysis is expected to play an important role in nanophotonics and plasmonics for both the classical and quantum regimes .
this work was supported by agence nationale de la recherche ( anr ) , france , through the sinphonie ( anr-12-nano-0019 ) and placore ( anr-13-bs10 - 0007 ) grants .
the author gratefully acknowledges several discussions with g. bachelier .
the relation @xmath656 admits zeros @xmath100 as postulated in the text . writing @xmath45 one of such zero and @xmath657 the condition eq .
[ b1 ] means : @xmath658 from which we deduce after eliminating @xmath659 @xmath660 therefore a necessary but not sufficient condition for having zeros is that if @xmath661 for such a zero then @xmath662 while if @xmath663 then @xmath662 .
actually we also see from eq .
[ b2 ] that the zero are allowed to be located along the real or imaginary axis of the complex @xmath14 plane if @xmath664 along these axes .
this is in general not possible for a large class of permittivity function .
consider for example the quite general causal permittivity , i.e. , satisfying the kramers - krnig relation , defined by : @xmath665 with @xmath666 .
then we have also @xmath667 clearly , @xmath668 if @xmath669 and @xmath670 in contradiction with the necessary condition for zeros existence mentioned before .
this reasoning is valid in one quarter plane but now , if @xmath671 is a zero @xmath672 is also a zero . therefore , the absence of a zero in the quarter plane @xmath669 , @xmath670 implies the absence of zero in the second quarter plane @xmath673 , @xmath670 and therefore eq .  [ b1 ] do not admit any zero in the upper half plane for a very usual permittivity like eq .
[ b3 ] . actually , the case @xmath674 should be handled separately .
we find from eq .
[ b4 ] that for such value @xmath664 .
this is acceptable in order to have a zero existence in agreement with eq .
however , from eq .  [ b2 ]
we find also that if a zero exists along the axis @xmath674 then we should have as well @xmath675 .
this is in contradiction with eq .
[ b4 ] which implies @xmath676 .
this completes the proof for the permittivity given by eq .
+ the question concerning the generality of the proof is however still handling .
huttner and barnett mentioned the existence of such a proof in the landau and lifschitz text - book  @xcite but     has no solution in the upper frequency half - plane ( see refs .
@xcite).,width=309 ]    it is relevant to detail the missing proof here . in order to get the complete result
we will use a method used by landau and lifshitz ( see ref .
@xcite p. 380 ) .
in the complex @xmath14-plane we define @xmath677 . from the properties of @xmath678 we deduce @xmath679 .
this implies that @xmath680 is real along the imaginary axis and that @xmath681 and @xmath682 along the real axis .
furthermore due to causality we have @xmath683 and therefore @xmath684 if @xmath669 along the real axis .
now we consider the closed contour integral ( see fig .
1 ) @xmath685 along @xmath686 made of the real axis and of the semi circle @xmath687 of infinite radius @xmath688 in the upper half plane .
however , @xmath689 is a real number and since @xmath680 is not real along the real axis there is no pole along @xmath686 unless @xmath689 is infinite or null .
therefore , since @xmath680 is analytical in the upper half plane eq .
[ b5 ] gives the numbers of zeros of @xmath690 in this half space .
+ we then rewrite eq .
[ b5 ] as an integral in the complex @xmath691 : @xmath692 where @xmath693 is the image of @xmath686 along the mapping @xmath694 .
in particular the origin @xmath695 is mapped on it self while the semi circle of radius @xmath696 is mapped onto the circle of radius @xmath697 .
the half real axis @xmath698 corresponding to @xmath351 is mapped onto a complex curve located in the upper half plane of the complex @xmath680-space ( since @xmath699 along this half line ) .
similarly , the second half axis @xmath700 is mapped in the lower half plane .
as shown on the figure if @xmath701 then the contour integral omits the point @xmath702 and there is no pole involved in the integral which therefore vanishes .
we thus deduce that eq .
[ b1 ] has no solution in the upper half - plane in the @xmath14 space which is the proof needed .
the calculation of @xmath93 defined by the bromwich integral eq .
[ 95 ] for @xmath703 : @xmath704 can be handled after closing the contour integral in the lower plane . however , since @xmath389 is not analytical in such lower plane we must include the poles @xmath100 ( all located in the lower plane see appendix a ) , i.e. the residues , in the integral .
we use the separation : @xmath705\nonumber\\ \label{96}\end{aligned}\ ] ] and express it as a function of @xmath706 near each poles ( i.e , in the limit @xmath707 ) .
we get : @xmath708 from the condition @xmath104 and the equality @xmath709 we then get for @xmath703 after integration in the lower plane eq .  [ 98 ] and @xmath106 for @xmath97 ( after integration in the upper plane where no pole are present ) .
the value at @xmath108 deserves some careful analysis . indeed ,
if @xmath108 the integration along the semicircle do not vanish exponentially with it radius @xmath696 and if we choose to integrate in the upper half plane ( where there is no pole ) we get @xmath710 if @xmath688 since @xmath711 in this limit in the upper half plane .
therefore we have indeed @xmath712 and the function is continuous at @xmath108 . of course the null value for negative time @xmath713
have no meaning since the laplace transform is only interested in the evolution for positive time .
+ this leads to the sum rule : @xmath714=0.\label{101}\end{aligned}\]]this leads to the sum rule : @xmath714=0.\label{99}\end{aligned}\ ] ] the free term @xmath110 is defined as @xmath715e^{p(t - t_0)}}{\omega_\alpha^2+(1+\bar{\chi}(p))p^2}\nonumber\\ = u_\alpha(t - t_0)\dot{q}_{\alpha , j}(t_0)+\dot{u}_\alpha(t - t_0)q_{\alpha , j}(t_0)\nonumber\\ \label{102}\end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath716 like for @xmath113 we get @xmath717 .
the last line of eq .
[ 102 ] is therefore justified from the fact that the laplace transform of @xmath718 is @xmath719 .
now , the boundary condition at @xmath115 imposes @xmath117 .
therefore , from eq .  [ 103 ] we deduce the second sum rule : @xmath720=1.\label{104}\end{aligned}\ ] ] the value at @xmath108 is not defined univocally since @xmath718 defined through the bromwich integral of @xmath721 is discontinuous .
we point out that considering a direct integration at @xmath108 could lead to contradictions since the integration along @xmath722 do not vanish . if we choose to integrate in the upper half plane ( where there is no pole ) we get @xmath723 if @xmath688 since @xmath711 in this limit in the upper half plane .
we would get @xmath724 ( a similar calculation could be done in the lower space including poles and residues and we would obtain once again @xmath725 ) . here
we considered carefully the limit to prevent us from such a contradiction .
the source field can be written as : @xmath726 .
after some algebras we get : @xmath727 where we introduced the green function:@xmath728 computed by contour integration in the complex plane and solution of @xmath729 .
of course , along the real axis @xmath730 we get @xmath731 which is the usual green function for an homogenous medium .
we can also write this field without introducing @xmath14 by using the green propagator @xmath732 which leads to : @xmath733 we have also @xmath734 which represent the generalization of retarded propagator expansion for a lossy and dispersive medium .
the role of causality is here crucial since the modes are always damped when the time is growing in the future direction as expected from pure thermodynamical considerations .
this means in particular that @xmath735 tends to vanish exponentially as @xmath75 goes to infinity .
importantly , in the vacuum limit ( @xmath126 ) we get naturally @xmath736 and in the limit @xmath407 we obtain the retarded potential @xmath737 however , in the vacuum limit we have also : @xmath738 therefore @xmath739 actually vanishes and we get in this limit @xmath740 as it should be . now , from eq .
[ 105 ] and from the field definition we easily get the integral formulas for @xmath741 and @xmath742 : @xmath743 these equations have a clear interpretation in term of generalized hertz potentials . in particular , taking the limit @xmath176 and using the properties of convolutions , together with the fact that @xmath744 , we get @xmath745 with @xmath746
by rewriting @xmath747 in eq .  [ cool ]
we get after some rearrangements : @xmath748}{p^2(1+\bar{\chi}(p))}\label{137}\end{aligned}\ ] ] which involves the scalar green function defined in eq .
[ 104 ] and from @xmath749 @xmath750\nonumber\\+ \mathbf{i}\delta^{3}(\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{x'})\label{138}\end{aligned}\ ] ] these formulas must be taken carefully since they are not actually valid at the source location , i.e. , if @xmath751 due to the bad convergence of the series defining the dyadic green function .
after regularization we can obtain the result @xmath752\nonumber\\ + \frac{c^2}{p^2(1+\bar{\chi}(p))}\mathbf{l}\delta^{3}(\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{x'})\label{139}\end{aligned}\ ] ] and @xmath753\label{140}\end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath754 a dyadic term depending on the way we define the principal value  @xcite : @xmath755 for a small exclusion spherical volume surrounding the point @xmath756 we get @xmath757 , i.e. , the depolarization field predicted by the clausius - mosotti formula  @xcite . + in the particular case @xmath477 we write @xmath758 and similarly for other green functions .
we also consider the time evolution which in vacuum relies on the propagators @xmath759 explicit calculations lead to : @xmath760 and similarly for the transverse part of @xmath761 : @xmath762 while for the longitudinal part we get : @xmath763 we deduce automatically the boundary conditions @xmath764 .
we also obtain @xmath765 and @xmath766 from which we obtain the boundary condition : @xmath767 .
we thus obtain : @xmath768 finally , from eq .  [ 139 ] we find explicitly for the time dependent @xmath769 field : @xmath770.\label{a16}\end{aligned}\ ] ]
from eq .  [ b ]
we deduce in the hopfield model @xmath771 this leads to the solution @xmath772 and therefore to @xmath773 where the permittivity is given by the lossless lorentz - drude formula @xmath774 . for the transverse fields we expand the different fields as @xmath775 with @xmath776 and @xmath777 .
now , we write @xmath294 with @xmath295 a transverse vector field .
we thus have @xmath778 with @xmath779 .
we thus get the equation @xmath780 near the singularities @xmath781 we get : @xmath782\widetilde{e}_{\alpha , j}(\omega)=\omega_0 ^ 2\gamma_{\alpha , j}\delta(\omega-\omega_0)\end{aligned}\ ] ] and therefore supposing the regularity ( as for the longitudinal case ) we have @xmath783 . the secular equation @xmath784\widetilde{e}_{\alpha , j,\pm}(\omega)=0 $ ] associated with the transverse modes can be easily solved and this indeed leads to @xmath785 with @xmath786 with @xmath302 an amplitude coefficient for the transverse polariton mode .
importantly we again get from the regularity condition @xmath787 and thus @xmath788 like for the longitudinal mode .
this implies @xmath789 and from eq .
[ reeu ] we get @xmath790 . at the end of the day
we obtain the following fields amplitudes @xmath791 and @xmath792 ( using definitions similar to eq .  [ defi ] ) .
these define the hopfield transformation between the old variables @xmath793 , @xmath794 , @xmath795 , @xmath796 and the new polaritonic variables representing the normal coordinates of the problem @xmath302 and @xmath797 .
up to a normalization this is equivalent to the work by hopfield .
we start with the amplitude for the transverse polariton field @xmath798 where @xmath366 is a frequency window centered on the polariton pulsation @xmath363:=\omega'_{\alpha , m}$ ] .
this field is equivalently written as @xmath799 where @xmath800 is a window function such as @xmath801 if @xmath14 belongs to the interval @xmath366 and @xmath802 otherwise . from the commuting properties of @xmath162 ( see eqs .  [ 33 ] and [ commuting ] ) we deduce the commutator : @xmath370=\frac{\hbar}{\pi}\delta_{\alpha,\beta}\delta_{j , l}\nonumber\\ \cdot\int_0^{+\infty } \frac{d\omega\omega^4\tilde{\varepsilon}''(\omega)}{|\omega_\alpha^2-\tilde{\varepsilon}(\omega)\omega^2|^2 } f_{\alpha , m}(\omega)f_{\beta , n}(\omega)\end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath803 .
now consider the integral : @xmath804 since for weak losses the integrand is extremely peaked on the value @xmath390 we can write @xmath805 as @xmath806 we use the approximation @xmath807 which is valid near the pole where the conditions @xmath808 approximately holds for transverse polaritons .
we thus get @xmath809 with @xmath810 and @xmath811 . and where we used the integral @xmath812 which is easily calculated in the complex plane .
from this we finally obtain the commutator of eq .
[ window ] .
we point out that the result does not explicitly depends on the extension of the frequency windows @xmath366 if losses and dispersion are weak enough to have @xmath813 .
+ for the longitudinal polariton field we have a similar calculation .
starting with the definition : @xmath814 we can calculate the commutator @xmath815 $ ] .
we have @xmath401=\frac{\hbar}{\pi}\delta_{\alpha,\beta}\nonumber\\ \cdot \int_0^{+\infty } d\omega\frac{\tilde{\varepsilon}''(\omega)}{|\tilde{\varepsilon}(\omega)|^2 } f_{\alpha , m}(\omega)f_{\beta , n}(\omega)\end{aligned}\ ] ] with again @xmath803 .
we have to evaluate the integral @xmath816 which like for the transverse modes in the limit of weak losses and dispersion leads after straightforward calculations to @xmath817from this we deduce the commutator given in eq .  [ windowlong ] .
jauch and k.m .
watson , phys .
rev . * 74 * , 950 ( 1948 ) .
l. knll , w. vogel , d .-
welsch , phys .
a * 36 * , 63803 ( 1987 ) .
glauber , m. lewenstein , phys .
a * 43 * , 467 ( 1991 ) .
m. wubs , l.g .
suttorp , a. lagendijk , phys .
a * 68 * , 013822 ( 2003 ) .
p. d. drummond , phys .
a * 42 * , 6845 ( 1990 ) .
constantinou , o. al - dossary , m. babiker , j. phys .
: condens .
matter * 5 * , 5581 ( 1993 ) .
milonni , j. mod . phys . * 42 * , 1991 ( 1995 ) . o. al - dossary , m. babiker , n. enfati , phys rev .
a * 54 * , 2419 ( 1996 ) .
j.c . garrison , r.y .
chiao , phys .
a 70 , 053826 ( 2004 ) .
jeffers , n. imoto , r. loudon , phys .
a. * 47 * , 3346 ( 1993 ) .
s. barnett , j. jeffers , a. gatti , r. loudon , phys . rev .
a. * 57 * , 2134 ( 1998 ) . c. genet , a. lambrecht , s. raynaud , phys
a. * 67 * , 043811 ( 2003 ) . m. s. tame , c. lee , j. lee , d. ballester , m. paternostro , a. v. zayats , m. s. kim , phys .
* 101 * , 190504 ( 2008 ) .
d. ballester , m. s. tame , c. lee , j. lee , m. s. kim , phys . rev
. a. * 79 * , 053845 ( 2009 ) .
d. ballester , m. s. tame , m. s. kim , phys .
a. * 82 * , 012325 ( 2010 ) .
b. huttner , j.j .
baumberg , s. m. barnett , europhys .
lett * 16 * , 177 ( 1991 ) .
b. huttner , s. m. barnett , phys .
a * 46 * , 4306 ( 1992 ) .
b. huttner , s. m. barnett , europhys .
lett * 18 * , 487 ( 1992 ) .
b. huttner , s. m. barnett , r. loudon , phys .
lett . * 68 * , 3698 ( 1992 ) .
r. matloob , r. loudon , s. m. barnett , j. jeffers , phys .
a * 52 * , 4823 ( 1995 ) .
r. matloob , r. loudon , phys .
a * 53 * , 4567 ( 1996 ) .
s. m. barnett , the quantum optics of dielectrics , in quantum fluctuations , lecture 3 , eds . s. reynaud e. giacobino and j. zinn - justin ( elsevier , amsterdam , 1997 ) .
u. fano , phys . rev . * 103 * , 1202 ( 1956 ) .
j. j. hopfield , phys .
rev.*112 * , 1555 ( 1958 ) . k. huang , proc .
a * 208 * , 352 ( 1951 ) .
m. wubs , l.g .
suttorp , phys .
a * 63 * , 043809 ( 2001 ) .
suttorp , m. wubs , phys .
a * 70 * , 013816 ( 2004 ) .
l. g. suttorp a. j. van wonderen , europhys .
lett * 67 * , 766 ( 2004 ) .
l. g. suttorp , j. phys . a : math
. theor . * 40 * , 3697 ( 2007 ) .
n.  a.  r. bhat , j. e. sipe , phys .
a * 73 * , 063808 ( 2006 ) .
a. c. judge , m. j. steel , j. e. sipe , c. m. de sterke , phys .
a * 87 * , 033824 ( 2013 ) .
t. g. philbin , new j. phys .
* 12 * , 123008 ( 2010 ) .
t. gruner , d .-
welsch , phys .
a * 51 * , 3246 ( 1995 ) .
t. gruner , d .-
welsch , phys .
rev . a * 53 * , 1818 ( 1996 ) .
m.  s. yeung , t. k. gustafson , phys .
a * 54 * , 5227 ( 1996 ) . c. cohen - tannoudji , j. dupont - roc , and g. grynberg ,
atom - photon interactions : basic processes and applications ( john wiley , new york , 1992 ) . c. girard and a. dereux ,
report on progress in physics * 59 * , 657 ( 1996 ) .
l.  novotny , and b.  hecht , principles of nano - optics , ( cambridge press , london , 2006 ) .
e. m. lifshitz , zh .
* 29 * , 94 ( 1955 ) [ sov .
jetp 2 , 73 ( 1956 ) ] .
v. l. ginzburg , theoretical physics and astrophysics ( pergamon , oxford , ny , 1979 ) .
s. m. rytov , theory of electrical fluctuations and thermal radiation ( publishing house , academy of sciences , ussr , 1953 ) . h. b. callen and t. a. welton , phys .
rev . * 83 * , 34 ( 1951 ) .
w. milonni , the quantum vacuum : an introduction to quantum electrodynamics ( academic , san diego , ca , 1994 ) . f. s. s. rosa , d. a. r. davit , p. w. milonni , phys rev .
a 81 , 033812 ( 2010 ) .
g. s. agarwal , phys .
a * 11 * , 230 ( 1975 ) .
j. m. wylie , j.e .
sipe , phys .
a * 30 * , 1185 ( 1984 ) .
r. carminati , j. j. greffet , phys .
. lett . * 82 * , 1160 ( 1999 ) .
j. p. mulet , k. joulain , r. carminati , , j.j .
greffet , appl .
78 * , 2931 ( 2001 ) .
e. rousseau , a. siria , g. jourdan , nature phot . 3 , 514 , ( 2009 ) .
c. henkel , k. joulain , j. p. mulet , j. j. greffet , j. opt .
. opt . * 4 * , s109 ( 2002 ) .
s. scheel , l. knll , d .-
welsch , phys .
a * 58 * , 700 ( 1998 ) . h. t. dung , l. knll , d .-
welsch , phys .
a * 57 * , 3931 ( 1998 ) .
h. t. dung , l. knll , d .-
welsch , phys .
a * 62 * , 053804 ( 2000 ) .
l. knll , s. scheel , d .-
welsch , qed in dispersing and absorbing media , in coherence and statistics of photons and atoms , chap .
1 , ed . j. perina ( wiley , new - york , 2001 ) .
r. matloob , phys .
a * 60 * , 50 ( 1999 ) .
r. matloob , phys .
a * 69 * , 052110 ( 2004 ) .
r. fermani , s. scheel , p. l. knight , phys .
a * 73 * , 032902 ( 2006 ) . c. raabe , s. scheel , d .-
welsch , phys .
a * 75 * , 053813 ( 2007 ) .
m. amooshahi , f. kheirandish , j. phys .
a : math . theor . * 41 * , 275402 ( 2008 ) .
s. scheel , s.y .
buhmann , acta phys .
slovaca * 58 * , 675 ( 2008 ) .
d. dzotjan , a. s. sorensen , m. fleschhauer , phys . rev .
b * 82 * , 075427 ( 2010 ) .
d. martin - cano , a. gonzalez - tudela , l. martin - moreno , f. j. garcia - vidal , c. tejedor , e. moreno , phys .
b * 84 * , 235306 ( 2011 ) .
t. hummer , f.j .
garcia - vidal , l. martin .
moreno , d. zueco , phys .
b * 87 * , 115419 ( 2013 )
. x. w. chen , v. sandoghdar , m. agio , phys .
lett . * 110 * , 153605 ( 2013 ) .
a. delga , j. feist , j. bravo - abad , f. j. garcia vidal , j. opt .
16 , 114018 ( 204 ) . j. hakami , l. wang , m. s. zubairy , phys .
a * 89 * , 053835 ( 2014 ) .
choquette , k. p. marzlin , phys .
a * 85 * , 063841 ( 2012 ) .
a. l. grimsmo , a. h. vaskinn , p. k. rekdal , b. s. k. skagerstam , phys .
a * 87 * , 022101 ( 2013 ) .
b. rousseaux , d. dzsotjan , g. colas des francs , h. r. jauslin , c. couteau , s. guerin , phys . rev .
b * 93 * , 045422 ( 2016 ) .
i. r. senitzky , phys .
lett . * 31 * , 955 ( 1973 ) .
j. r. ackerhalt , p. l. knight , j. h. eberly , phys .
lett . * 30 * , 456 ( 1973 ) .
p. w. milonni , j. r. ackerhalt , w. a.smith , phys .
31 * , 958 ( 1973 ) .
j. dalibard , j. dupont - roc , c. cohen - tannoudji , j. physique * 43 * , 1617 ( 1982 ) .
milonni , phys .
a * 82 * , 225 ( 1981 ) .
a. drezet , phys .
a * 94 * , 053826 ( 2016 ) . c. cohen - tannoudji , j. dupont - roc , and g. grynberg , photons and atoms : an introduction to quantum electrodynamics ( john wiley , new york , 1989 ) .
e. power , s. zienau , phi .
a251 , 427 ( 1959 ) .
r. zwanzig , nonequilibrium statistical mechanics ( oxford university press , oxford , 2001 ) .
o. d. stefano , s. savasta , r. girlanda , phys .
rev . a * 61 * , 023803 ( 2000 ) .
s. savasta , o. d. stefano , r. girlanda , phys .
a * 65 * , 043801 ( 2002 ) .
m. khanbekyan , l. kn'oll , d .-
welsch , phys .
a * 67 * , 063812 ( 2003 ) .
m. khanbekyan , l. kn'oll , d .-
welsch , a. a. semenov , w. vogel , phys .
a * 72 * , 053813 ( 2005 ) .
j.  d. jackson , classical electrodynamics 3rd .
( j.  wiley and sons , new york , 1999 )
. j. a. wheeler , r. p. feynman , rev .
* 21 * , 425 ( 1949 ) p. c. w. davies , the physics of time asymmetry ( the university of california press , berkeley , 1974 ) .
d. zeh , the physical basis of the direction of time ( springer , berlin - heldeberg , 2007 ) .
h. goldstein , c. p. poole jr .
, j. l. safko , classical mechanics 3 rd .
( addison wesley , 2001 ) .      for the lorentz drude model we have the conductivity @xmath825 which equals @xmath826 defined in section ii for @xmath827 .
now , in the huttner barnet model we introduce therefore a singular coefficient @xmath828 in the definition eq .  [ 5 ] of the dipole density . in order to have finite quantity and to omit the use of the square root of a dirac function we define @xmath829 in order to have @xmath830 .
the mechanical lagrangian ( see eq .
[ 2 ] ) becomes @xmath831 in agreement with hopfield .
this leads to the mechanical and electromagnetic evolution equations discussed in the main text .
more precisely we have near the singularity @xmath781 the condition @xmath832 .
if we suppose @xmath278 to be regular we get the result discussed in the text
. if @xmath278 is singular then @xmath833 would be even more singular and this would contradict the equation
. therefore regularity at @xmath282 must be imposed .
s. t. ho , p. kumar , j. opt .
b * 10 * , 1620 ( 1993 ) .
f. tassone , f. bassani , l. c. andreani , il nuovo cimento d * 12 * , 1673 ( 1990 ) .
d. gerace , l. c. andreani , phys .
b * 75 * , 235325 ( 2007 ) .
g. juzeliunas , phys .
a * 53 * , 3543 ( 1996 ) .
y. todorov , phys .
b * 89 * , 075115 ( 2014 ) .
y. todorov , phys .
b * 91 * , 125409 ( 2015 ) . m.d .
tokman , m. a. erukhimova , v.v .
vdovin , ann .
phys * 360 * , 571 ( 2015 ) .
l. brillouin , wave propagation and group velocity ( academic press , new york,1960 ) j. yang , m. perrin , p. lalanne , phys . rev .
x * 5 * , 021008 ( 2015 ) .
a. archambault , f. marquier , j. j. greffet , phys .
b * 82 * , 035411 ( 2010 ) .