arXiv reader

Asymptotic analysis of subwavelength halide perovskite resonators

Konstantinos Alexopoulos and Bryn Davies

arXiv
2202.07274v1 · PDF · 15 February 2022
Categories
math.AP, physics.optics
Licence
CC BY 4.0 The site shows the text.

Abstract

Halide perovskites are promising materials with many significant applications in photovoltaics and optoelectronics. In this paper, we use integral methods to quantify the resonant properties of halide perovskite nano-particles. We prove that, for arbitrarily small particles, the subwavelength resonant frequencies can be expressed in terms of the eigenvalues of the Newtonian potential associated with its shape. We also characterize the hybridized subwavelength resonant frequencies of a dimer of two halide perovskite particles. Finally, we examine the specific case of spherical resonators and demonstrate that our new results are consistent with previous works.

Items 44

Theorem

Theorem 2.1 (Lippmann-Schwinger Integral Representation Formula)

04ZN

The solution to the Helmholtz problem (?) is given by

\begin{aligned} u(x)-u_{in}(x) = -\delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \int_D G(x-y,\delta k_0) u(y) \mathrm{d} y, \ \ x\in\mathbb{R}^d, \end{aligned}

where the function \xi:\mathbb{C}\to\mathbb{C} describes the permittivity contrast between D and the background and is given by

\xi(\omega ,k) = \mu_0(\varepsilon(\omega ,k) - \varepsilon_0).
Proof of Theorem 2.1

We see from (?) that \Delta u + \delta^2\omega ^2\varepsilon(\omega ,k)\mu_0u=0 in D, so it holds that

\begin{aligned} \Delta u +\delta^2 k_0^2 u = -\delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)u, \end{aligned}

where \xi(\omega ,k) = \mu_0(\varepsilon(\omega ,k) - \varepsilon_0). Therefore, the Helmholtz problem (\ref{2.4}) becomes

\begin{aligned} (\Delta + \delta^2 k_0^2)(u(y) - u_{in}(y)) = -\delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)u(y) \chi_D(y), \ \ y\in\mathbb{R}^d \setminus\partial D, \end{aligned}

with \chi_D being the indicator function of the set D. Then, we know that for x\in\mathbb{R}^d and y\in\mathbb{R}^d\setminus\partial D, the following identity holds:

\begin{aligned} \nabla_y \cdot \Big[ G(x-y,\delta k_0) \nabla_y \Big( u(y)&-u_{in}(y) \Big) - \Big( u(y)-u_{in}(y) \Big) \nabla_y G(x-y,\delta k_0) \Big] \\ &= -\delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)u(y)G(x-y,\delta k_0) \chi_D(y) - \Big( u(y)-u_{in}(y) \Big)\delta_0(x-y). \end{aligned}

Let S_R be a large sphere with radius R large enough so that D \subset S_R. Integrating the above identity over y \in S_r \setminus \partial D and letting R\to+\infty, we can use the radiation condition (?) in the far field and the transmission conditions on \partial D to obtain the desired integral representation formula.

Lemma

Lemma 2.2

QJA5

Suppose that d=3. The operator K^{\delta k_0}_D can be rewritten as

\begin{aligned} K^{\delta k_0}_D = \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} (\delta k_0)^n K^{(n)}_D, \end{aligned}

where the series converges in the L^2(D) \to L^2(D) operator norm if \delta k_0 is small enough.

Proof of Lemma 2.2

This follows from an application of the Taylor expansion on the operator K^{\delta k_0}_D. Indeed, using Taylor expansion on the second variable of G, we can see that

G(x-y,\delta k_0) = \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} (\delta k_0)^n \frac{\partial^n G}{\partial k^n}(x-y,k)\Big|_{k=0}.

Since we are working in three dimensions,

G(x,k) = - \frac{e^{ik|x|}}{4\pi|x|}

and, thus,

G(x-y,0) = -\frac{1}{4\pi|x-y|} \quad\text{and}\quad \frac{\partial^n G}{\partial k^n}(x-y,k) = -\frac{i}{4\pi} \frac{(i|x-y|)^{n-1}}{n!} \quad\text{for }n>0.

Hence,

\begin{aligned} G(x-y,\delta k_0) &= \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} (\delta k_0)^n \frac{\partial^n G}{\partial k^n}(x-y,k)\Big|_{k=0} = \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} (\delta k_0)^n \left(-\frac{i}{4\pi}\right) \frac{(i|x-y|)^{n-1}}{n!}, \end{aligned}

and then, multiplying by u and integrating over D, gives

\begin{aligned} K^{\delta k_0}_D[u](y) &= \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} (\delta k_0)^n K^{(n)}_D[u](y), \end{aligned}

which is the desired result.

Proposition

Proposition 2.3

MBEN

Let \lambda _{\delta} denote an eigenvalue of the operator K^{\delta k_0}_D in dimension three. Then, if \delta is small, it is approximately given by

\begin{aligned} \lambda _{\delta} \approx \lambda _0 + \delta k_0 \langle K^{(1)}_D u_0, u_0 \rangle. \end{aligned}
Used by Proof
Proof of Proposition 2.3

We start by truncating the O(\delta^2) term in the expansion (?). Then, we have that

\begin{aligned} K^{\delta k_0}_D u_{\delta} = \lambda _{\delta} u_{\delta} \ &\Leftrightarrow \ (K^{(0)}_D + \delta k_0 K^{(1)}_D)u_{\delta} = \lambda _{\delta} u_{\delta} \ \Leftrightarrow \ \langle (K^{(0)}_D + \delta k_0 K^{(1)}_D)u_{\delta} , u_0 \rangle = \langle \lambda _{\delta} u_{\delta}, u_0 \rangle. \end{aligned}

Since K^{(0)}_D is self-adjoint, we have that

\begin{aligned} \ \lambda _0\langle u_{\delta} , u_0 \rangle + \delta k_0 \langle K^{(1)}_D u_{\delta}, u_0 \rangle = \lambda _{\delta} \langle u_{\delta},u_0 \rangle. \end{aligned}

Finally, since u_{\delta}\approx u_0 we find that

\begin{aligned} \lambda _{\delta} = \lambda _0 + \delta k_0 \frac{\langle K^{(1)}_D u_{\delta}, u_0 \rangle}{\langle u_{\delta},u_0 \rangle} \approx \lambda _0 + \delta k_0 \langle K^{(1)}_D u_0, u_0 \rangle, \end{aligned}

which is the desired result.

Corollary

Corollary 2.3.1

616Q

Let \lambda _{\delta} denote an eigenvalue of the operator K^{\delta k_0}_D in three dimensions. Then, if \delta is small, it is approximately given by

\begin{aligned} \lambda _{\delta} \approx \lambda _0 - \frac{i}{4\pi} \delta k_0 \mathbb{B}, \end{aligned}

where \mathbb{B}:=(\int_D u_0(y) \mathrm{d} y)^2 is a constant.

Proof of Corollary 2.3.1

From (?), we get that

\begin{aligned} K^{(1)}_D[u](x) = -\frac{i}{4\pi} \int_{D} \frac{ (i|x-y|)^{1-1} }{1!}u(y)\mathrm{d} y = -\frac{i}{4\pi} \int_{D} u(y) \mathrm{d} y. \end{aligned}

Let us define the constant \mathbb{B}:=(\int_D u_0(y) \mathrm{d} y)^2. Then, we observe that

\begin{aligned} \langle K^{(1)}_D u_0, u_0 \rangle = \int_D \left(-\frac{i}{4\pi}\right)u_0(y) \int_D \overline{u_0}(x)\mathrm{d} x \mathrm{d} y = -\frac{i}{4\pi} \left( \int_D u_0(y) \mathrm{d} y \right)^2 = -\frac{i}{4\pi}\mathbb{B}. \end{aligned}

Substituting into (2.3) gives the desired result.

Uses Proposition 2.3
Proposition

Proposition 2.4

PBG0

Let d=3 and let \omega _{\delta} be defined by (?). Then, as \delta\to0, the O(\delta^4) approximation of the subwavelength resonant frequencies \omega _s and the associated wavenumbers k_s of the single halide perovskite resonator \Omega = \delta D + z satisfy

1 - \delta^2 \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) \lambda _{\delta} = -\delta^4 k_0^2 \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) \langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], u_{\delta} \rangle.
Used by Proof
Proof of Proposition 2.4

For \psi \in L^{2}(D), and dropping the O(\delta^4) term, we have

\Big[(I - A_0 -\delta k_0 A_1)^{-1}+(I - A_0 -\delta k_0 A_1)^{-1} (\delta k_0)^2 A_2 (I - A_0 -\delta k_0 A_1)^{-1}\Big][\psi]=0.

We apply a pole-pencil decomposition, as it is defined in [AFKRYZ], to the term (I - A_0 -\delta k_0 A_1)^{-1}[\psi] and obtain

(I - A_0 -\delta k_0 A_1)^{-1}[\psi] = \frac{\langle u_{\delta},\psi \rangle u_{\delta}}{1 - \delta^2 \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) \lambda _{\delta}} + R(\delta)[\psi],

where the remainder term R(\delta)[\psi] can be dropped. Hence, (Proof) is, at leading order, equivalent to

\begin{aligned} \frac{\langle u_{\delta},\psi \rangle u_{\delta}}{1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) \lambda _{\delta}} + \frac{\langle u_{\delta},\psi \rangle u_{\delta}}{1 - \delta^2 \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) \lambda _{\delta}} (\delta k_0)^2 A_2 \frac{\langle u_{\delta},\psi \rangle u_{\delta}}{1 - \delta^2 \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) \lambda _{\delta}} = 0, \end{aligned}

which reduces to

\begin{aligned} \frac{u_{\delta}}{1 - \delta^2 \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) \lambda _{\delta}} + \frac{u_{\delta}\langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], u_{\delta} \rangle}{(1 - \delta^2 \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) \lambda _{\delta})^2} \delta^4 k_0^2 \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) = 0, \end{aligned}

which can be rearranged to give the desired result.

Remark

Remark

S4J4

In the appendix, we will recover a formula for \langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], u_{\delta} \rangle.

Corollary

Corollary 2.4.1

1T9L

Let d=3. Then, as \delta\to0, the O(\delta^8) approximation of the subwavelength resonant frequencies of the halide perovskite resonator \Omega = \delta D + z are given by

1 - \frac{\omega _s^2}{\omega _{\delta}^2} \lambda _{\delta} (\varepsilon(\omega _s,k_s) - \varepsilon_0) \frac{64 \pi^2 \gamma ^2}{\alpha ^2 \mu_0 \delta^4 k_0^2 \mathbb{B}^2} = - \frac{\delta^4 \omega _s^2 k_0^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s)}{8\pi} \mathbb{F}.
Proof of Corollary 2.4.1

By a direct calculation and using (?), we have

\begin{aligned} 1 - \delta^2 \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) \lambda _{\delta} &\ = 1 - \delta^2 \omega _s^2 \mu_0(\varepsilon(\omega _s,k_s)-\varepsilon_0) \lambda _{\delta} \\ &\overset{(\ref{w_e k_e for d=3})}{=} 1 - \delta^2 \frac{\omega _s^2}{\omega _{\delta}^2} \mu_0(\varepsilon(\omega _s,k_s)-\varepsilon_0) \lambda _{\delta} \frac{64 \pi^2 \gamma ^2}{\alpha ^2 \mu_0^2 \delta^4 k_0^2 \mathbb{B}^2}\\ &\ = 1 - \frac{\omega _s^2}{\omega _{\delta}^2} \lambda _{\delta} (\varepsilon(\omega _s,k_s) - \varepsilon_0) \frac{64 \pi^2 \gamma ^2}{\alpha ^2 \mu_0 \delta^4 k_0^2 \mathbb{B}^2}. \end{aligned}

Then, using (?), the result follows.

Corollary

Corollary 2.4.2

CPYP

Let d=3. Then, as \delta\to0, the O(\delta^4) approximation of the subwavelength resonant frequencies of the halide perovskite resonator \Omega = \delta D + z can be computed as

1 - \delta^2 \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) \lambda _{\delta} = -\frac{\omega _s^2}{\omega _{\delta}^2}(\varepsilon(\omega _s,k_s) - \varepsilon_0) \frac{8\pi\gamma ^2\mathbb{F}}{\alpha ^2 \mu_0 \delta^2 \mathbb{B}^2}.
Proof of Corollary 2.4.2

Again, we can calculate this directly:

\begin{aligned} \frac{\delta^4 k_0^2 \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s)}{8\pi} \mathbb{F} &\ = \frac{1}{8\pi} \delta^4 \frac{\omega _s^2}{\omega _{\delta}^2} k_0^2 \mu_0 (\varepsilon(\omega _s,k_s) - \varepsilon_0) \omega _{\delta}^2 \\ &\overset{(\ref{w_e k_e for d=3})}{=} \frac{1}{8\pi} \frac{\omega _s^2}{\omega _{\delta}^2} \delta^4 k_0^2 \mu_0 (\varepsilon(\omega _s,k_s) - \varepsilon_0) \frac{64 \pi^2 \gamma ^2}{\alpha ^2 \mu_0^2 \delta^4 k_0^2 \mathbb{B}^2}\\ &= \frac{\omega _s^2}{\omega _{\delta}^2} (\varepsilon(\omega _s,k_s) - \varepsilon_0) \frac{8\pi\gamma ^2}{\alpha ^2 \mu_0 \delta^2 \mathbb{B}^2}. \end{aligned}

Then, using (?), the result follows.

Proposition

Proposition 2.5

P91P

Let d=3. For \omega close to the resonant frequency \omega _s, the field scattered by the halide perovskite nano-particle \Omega = \delta D + z can be approximated by

\begin{aligned} u(x)-u_{in}(x) \approx \frac{1 + \delta^2 \omega ^2 G(x-y,\delta k_0) \xi(\omega ,k)}{\delta^2 \omega ^2 \left( \lambda _{\delta} - \lambda _0 + \frac{i}{4\pi}\delta k_0 \mathbb{B} \right)\xi(\omega ,k)} \langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_{D} u_{\delta}. \end{aligned}
Proof of Proposition 2.5

Our goal is to find u\in L^{2}(D), u\ne 0 such that (?) is satisfied. Using the pole-pencil decomposition, we can rewrite

\begin{aligned} u(x)-u_{in}(x) \approx -\delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) &G(x-y,\delta k_0) \frac{\langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_{D} u_{\delta}}{1-\delta^2\omega ^2\xi(\omega ,k)\lambda _{\delta}} \\ &+ \delta^{4}k_0^2\omega ^2\xi(\omega ,k) \frac{\langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], u_{\delta} \rangle \langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_{D} u_{\delta}}{(1-\delta^2\omega ^2\xi(\omega ,k)\lambda _{\delta})^2}. \end{aligned}

Using (2.4) and plugging it in the above expression, we obtain

\begin{aligned} u(x)-u_{in}(x) &\approx \ -\delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)G(x-y,\delta k_0) \frac{\langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_{D} u_{\delta}}{-\delta^4 k_0^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], \upsilon _{\delta} \rangle} \\ &\ \ \ \ \ \ \ + \delta^{4}k_0^2\omega ^2\xi(\omega ,k) \frac{\langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], u_{\delta} \rangle \langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_{D} u_{\delta}}{\delta^8 k_0^4 \omega ^4 \xi(\omega ,k)^2 \langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], \upsilon _{\delta} \rangle^2} \\ &= \ \frac{G(x-y,\delta k_0)\langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_{D} u_{\delta}}{\delta^2 k_0^2 \langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], u_{\delta} \rangle} + \frac{\langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_{D} u_{\delta}}{\delta^4 k_0^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], u_{\delta} \rangle}. \end{aligned}

Thus, defining the constant \mathbb{F}:=8\pi \langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], u_{\delta} \rangle, we obtain

\begin{aligned} u(x)-u_{in}(x) \approx \ \frac{8\pi\Big(1+\delta^2\omega ^2G(x-y,\delta k_0)\xi(\omega ,k)\Big)}{\delta^4 k_0^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \mathbb{F}} \langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_{D} u_{\delta}. \end{aligned}

From the Appendix ?, we have that

\mathbb{F} = \frac{8\pi}{\delta^2 k_0^2} \left( \lambda _{\delta} - \lambda _0 + \frac{i}{4\pi} \delta k_0 \mathbb{B} \right).

Plugging it into (?), we obtain

u(x)-u_{in}(x) \approx \frac{8\pi\Big(1+\delta^2\omega ^2G(x-y,\delta k_0)\xi(\omega ,k)\Big)}{\delta^4 k_0^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \mathbb{F}} \frac{\delta^2 k_0^2}{8\pi} \frac{1}{\lambda _{\delta} - \lambda _0 + \frac{i}{4\pi} \delta k_0 \mathbb{B}} \langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_{D} u_{\delta},

from which the result follows.

Uses Proposition 2.4
Lemma

Lemma 2.6

GJAC

Suppose that d=2. Then, for fixed k_0 \in \mathbb{C}, the operator K^{\delta k_0}_D satisfies

\begin{aligned} K^{\delta k_0}_D = \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) K^{(-1)}_D + K^{(0)}_D + (\delta k_0)^2 \log( \hat{\gamma } \delta k_0 ) K^{(1)}_D + O( \delta^4 \log\delta), \end{aligned}

as \delta\to0, with convergence in the L^2(D)\to L^2(D) operator norm and the constant \hat{\gamma } being given by \hat{\gamma }:=\frac{1}{2}k_0\exp(\gamma -\frac{i\pi}{2}), where \gamma is the Euler constant.

Used by Proof
Proposition

Proposition 2.7

BVO5

Let \lambda _{\delta} denote an eigenvalue of the operator K^{\delta k_0}_D in dimension 2. Then, for small \delta, it is approximately given by:

\begin{aligned} \lambda _{\delta} \approx \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma })\lambda _{-1} + \langle K^{(0)}_D u_{-1}, u_{-1} \rangle + (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \langle K^{(1)}_D u_{-1}, u_{-1} \rangle, \end{aligned}

where \lambda _{-1} and u_{-1} are an eigenvalue and the associated eigenvector of the potential K^{(-1)}_D.

Used by Proof
Proof of Proposition 2.7

We start by dropping the O(\delta^4\log(\delta)) term on the expansion (2.6). Then, we have that

\begin{aligned} K^{\delta k_0}_D u_{\delta} = \lambda _{\delta} u_{\delta} \ &\Leftrightarrow \ (\log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) K^{(-1)}_D + K^{(0)}_D + (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) K^{(1)}_D)u_{\delta} = \lambda _{\delta} u_{\delta} \\ &\Leftrightarrow \ \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \lambda _{-1}\langle u_{\delta} , u_0 \rangle + \langle K^{(0)}_D u_{\delta}, u_{-1} \rangle + (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \langle K^{(1)}_D u_{\delta}, u_{-1} \rangle = \lambda _{\delta} \langle u_{\delta},u_{-1} \rangle. \end{aligned}

Therefore, assuming that u_{\delta} \approx u_{-1}, we can see that

\lambda _{\delta} \approx \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma })\lambda _{-1} + \langle K^{(0)}_D u_{-1}, u_{-1} \rangle + (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \langle K^{(1)}_D u_{-1}, u_{-1} \rangle,

which is the desired result.

Uses Lemma 2.6
Corollary

Corollary 2.7.1

RYOT

Let \lambda _{\delta} denote an eigenvalue of the operator K^{\delta k_0}_D in dimension 2. Then, for small \delta, it is approximately given by

\begin{aligned} \lambda _{\delta} \approx \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma })\lambda _{-1} - \frac{\mathbb{P}}{2\pi} - \frac{i(\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \mathbb{G}}{4\pi}, \end{aligned}

where \mathbb{P} and \mathbb{G} are constants that depend on u_{-1}.

Proof of Corollary 2.7.1

We observe that

\begin{aligned} \langle K^{(0)}_D u_{-1}, u_{-1} \rangle &= \int_D \left( -\frac{1}{2\pi} \int_D \log|x-y| u_{-1}(y) \mathrm{d} y \right) \overline{u_{-1}}(x) \mathrm{d} x \\ &= -\frac{1}{2\pi} \int_D \int_D \log|x-y| u_{-1}(y) \overline{u_{-1}}(x) \mathrm{d} y \mathrm{d} x =: - \frac{1}{2\pi} \mathbb{P}. \end{aligned}

Then, for u\in L^2(D),

\begin{aligned} K^{(1)}_D[u](x) &= \int_D \frac{\partial}{\partial k} G(x-y,k)\Big|_{k=0} u(y) \mathrm{d} y = \int_D \frac{\partial}{\partial k} \left( -\frac{i}{4} H_0^{(1)}(k|x-y|) \right)\Big|_{k=0} u(y) \mathrm{d} y= -\frac{i}{4\pi} \int_D \frac{u(y)}{|x-y|} \mathrm{d} y, \end{aligned}

and so, we have

\begin{aligned} \langle K^{(1)}_D u_{-1}, u_{-1} \rangle &= \int_D \left( -\frac{i}{4\pi} \int_D \frac{u_{-1}(y)}{|x-y|} \mathrm{d} y \right) \overline{u_{-1}}(x) \mathrm{d} x = -\frac{i}{4\pi} \int_D \int_D \frac{u_{-1}(y) \overline{u_{-1}}(x)}{|x-y|} \mathrm{d} y \mathrm{d} x =: -\frac{i}{4\pi} \mathbb{G}. \end{aligned}

Hence, from (2.7), we obtain the desired result.

Uses Proposition 2.7
Proposition

Proposition 2.8

U0V8

Let d=2 and let \omega _{\delta} be defined by (?). Then, as \delta\to0, the O(\delta^4) approximations of the subwavelength resonant frequencies \omega _s and the associated wavenumbers k_s of the single halide perovskite resonator \Omega = \delta D + z satisfy

\begin{aligned} 1 - \delta^2\omega _s^2\xi(\omega _s,k_s)\lambda _{\delta} = - \delta^6 k_0^4 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) \langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], u_{\delta} \rangle. \end{aligned}
Proof of Proposition 2.8

Applying a pole-pencil decomposition, we obtain

\Big( I - \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma })B_{-1} - B_0 - (\delta k_0)^{2}\log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) B_1 \Big)^{-1}[\cdot] = \frac{\langle \cdot,u_{\delta}\rangle u_{\delta} }{1 - \delta^2\omega _s^2\xi(\omega _s,k_s)\lambda _{\delta}} + R(\omega _s)[\cdot],

where the remainder R(\omega _s) is analytic in a neighborhood of \omega _{\delta} and can be dropped. Thus, dropping the O(\delta^6) term, we find for \psi\in L^2(D) that

\begin{aligned} \Big[\mathfrak{L} + \mathfrak{L} (\delta k_0)^{4}\log(\delta &k_0 \hat{\gamma }) B_2 \mathfrak{L}\Big](\psi) = 0. \end{aligned}

Applying a pole-pencil decomposition on (?), we get

\begin{aligned} \frac{\langle \psi,u_{\delta}\rangle u_{\delta}}{1 - \delta^2\omega _s^2\xi(\omega _s,k_s)\lambda _{\delta}} + \frac{\langle \psi,u_{\delta}\rangle u_{\delta} }{1 - \delta^2\omega _s^2\xi(\omega _s,k_s)\lambda _{\delta}} &(\delta k_0)^{4}\log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) B_2 \frac{\langle \psi,u_{\delta}\rangle u_{\delta}}{1 - \delta^2\omega _s^2\xi(\omega _s,k_s)\lambda _{\delta}} =0. \end{aligned}

This implies that

\begin{aligned} 1 - \delta^2\omega _s^2\xi(\omega _s,k_s)\lambda _{\delta} = - \delta^6 k_0^4 &\log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) \langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], u_{\delta} \rangle, \end{aligned}

which is the desired result.

Remark

Remark

31MH

In the Appendix ? of this paper, we recover a formula for \mathbb{S}.

Corollary

Corollary 2.8.1

K61J

Let d=2. Then, as \delta\to0, the O(\delta^{10}\log(\delta)^3) approximation of the subwavelength resonant frequencies of the halide perovskite resonator \Omega = \delta D + z can be computed as

\begin{aligned} 1 - \frac{\omega _s^2}{\omega _{\delta}^2} \cdot \frac{16\pi^2\gamma ^2\lambda _{\delta}\Big(\varepsilon(\omega _s,k_s)-\varepsilon_0\Big)}{\alpha ^2\delta^6\mu_0 k_0^4 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma })^2 \mathbb{G}^2} = - \frac{ i \delta^6 k_0^4 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s)\mathbb{S}}{4\pi}. \end{aligned}
Proof of Corollary 2.8.1

By a direct computation, we observe that

\begin{aligned} 1 - \delta^2 \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) \lambda _{\delta} &\ = \ 1 - \delta^2 \omega _s^2 \mu_0 \Big(\varepsilon(\omega _s,k_s)-\varepsilon_0\Big) \lambda _{\delta} \frac{\omega _{\delta}^2}{\omega _{\delta}^2}\\ &\overset{(\ref{w_e k_e for d=2})}{=} \ 1 - \delta^2 \frac{\omega _s^2}{\omega _{\delta}^2} \mu_0 \Big(\varepsilon(\omega _s,k_s)-\varepsilon_0\Big) \lambda _{\delta} \frac{16\pi^2\gamma ^2}{\alpha ^2\delta^8\mu_0^2 k_0^4 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma })^2 \mathbb{G}^2}\\ & \ = \ 1 - \frac{\omega _s^2}{\omega _{\delta}^2} \cdot \frac{16\pi^2\gamma ^2\lambda _{\delta}\Big(\varepsilon(\omega _s,k_s)-\varepsilon_0\Big)}{\alpha ^2\delta^6\mu_0 k_0^4 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma })^2 \mathbb{G}^2}, \end{aligned}

and thus, (?) gives the desired result.

Corollary

Corollary 2.8.2

JJIN

Let d=2. Then, as \delta\to0, the O(\delta^4 \log(\delta)) approximation of the subwavelength resonant frequencies of the halide perovskite resonator \Omega = \delta D + z can be computed as

\begin{aligned} 1 - \delta^2 \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) \lambda _{\delta} = - \frac{\omega _s^2}{\omega ^2_{\varepsilon}} \cdot \frac{ 4 \pi i \mathbb{S} \gamma ^2 \Big( \varepsilon(\omega _s,k_s) - \varepsilon_0 \Big) }{ \alpha ^2 \delta^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \mu_0 \mathbb{G}^2 }. \end{aligned}
Proof of Corollary 2.8.2

Again, to show this, we need to make a straightforward calculation:

\begin{aligned} \frac{ i \delta^6 k_0^4 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s)\mathbb{S}}{4\pi} &\ = \ \frac{i}{4\pi} \ \delta^6 \ k_0^4 \ \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \ \frac{\omega ^2_s}{\omega _{\delta}^2} \ \mathbb{S} \ \mu_0 \ \Big( \varepsilon(\omega _s,k_s) - \varepsilon_0 \Big) \ \omega _{\delta}^2 \\ &\overset{(\ref{w_e k_e for d=2})}{=} \ \frac{i}{4\pi} \ \delta^6 \ k_0^4 \ \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \ \frac{\omega ^2_s}{\omega _{\delta}^2} \ \mathbb{S} \ \mu_0 \ \Big( \varepsilon(\omega _s,k_s) - \varepsilon_0 \Big) \ \frac{16\pi^2\gamma ^2}{\alpha ^2\delta^8\mu_0^2 k_0^4 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma })^2 \mathbb{G}^2}\\ & \ = \ \frac{\omega _s^2}{\omega ^2_{\varepsilon}} \cdot \frac{ 4 \pi i \mathbb{S} \gamma ^2 \Big( \varepsilon(\omega _s,k_s) - \varepsilon_0 \Big) }{ \alpha ^2 \delta^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \mu_0 \mathbb{G}^2 }. \end{aligned}

Hence, (?) gives the desired result.

Proposition

Proposition 2.9

P8NW

Let d=2. For \omega real close to the resonant frequency \omega _s, the following approximation for the field scattered by the halide perovskite nano-particle \Omega = \delta D + z holds:

\begin{aligned} u(x) - u_{in}(x) \approx \frac{ 4\pi \Big( 1 + \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)G(x-y,\delta k_0) \Big) }{i \delta^6 k_0^4 \omega ^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \mathbb{S}} \langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_D u_{\delta}. \end{aligned}
Proof.

As we mentioned at the beginning or our analysis, our goal is to find u\in L^{2}(D), u\ne 0, such that (?) is satisfied. Using the pole-pencil decomposition on this Lippmann-Schwinger formulation of the problem, we can rewrite, as in Corollary 2.3 in [ADFMS],

\begin{aligned} u(x)-u_{in}(x) \ \approx -\delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) G(x-&y,\delta k_0) \frac{\langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_D u_{\delta}}{1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \lambda _{\delta}}\\ &+ \delta^6 k_0^4 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \frac{ \langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], u_{\delta} \rangle \langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_D u_{\delta}}{\Big(1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \lambda _{\delta}\Big)^2}, \end{aligned}

which, using (?), becomes:

\begin{aligned} u(x)-u_{in}(x) & \ \approx \ \frac{G(x-y,\delta k_0)\langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_D u_{\delta} }{\delta^4 k_0^4 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], u_{\delta} \rangle} + \frac{\langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_D u_{\delta}}{\delta^6 k_0^4 \omega ^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)\langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], u_{\delta} \rangle}. \end{aligned}

From (?), this gives

\begin{aligned} u(x)-u_{in}(x) & \ \approx \ \frac{ 4\pi \Big( 1 + \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)G(x-y,\delta k_0) \Big) }{i \delta^6 k_0^4 \omega ^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \mathbb{S}} \langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_D u_{\delta}, \end{aligned}

which is the desired result.

Proof

Proof

DDWT

As we mentioned at the beginning or our analysis, our goal is to find u\in L^{2}(D), u\ne 0, such that (?) is satisfied. Using the pole-pencil decomposition on this Lippmann-Schwinger formulation of the problem, we can rewrite, as in Corollary 2.3 in [ADFMS],

\begin{aligned} u(x)-u_{in}(x) \ \approx -\delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) G(x-&y,\delta k_0) \frac{\langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_D u_{\delta}}{1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \lambda _{\delta}}\\ &+ \delta^6 k_0^4 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \frac{ \langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], u_{\delta} \rangle \langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_D u_{\delta}}{\Big(1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \lambda _{\delta}\Big)^2}, \end{aligned}

which, using (?), becomes:

\begin{aligned} u(x)-u_{in}(x) & \ \approx \ \frac{G(x-y,\delta k_0)\langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_D u_{\delta} }{\delta^4 k_0^4 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], u_{\delta} \rangle} + \frac{\langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_D u_{\delta}}{\delta^6 k_0^4 \omega ^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)\langle K^{(2)}_D[u_{\delta}], u_{\delta} \rangle}. \end{aligned}

From (?), this gives

\begin{aligned} u(x)-u_{in}(x) & \ \approx \ \frac{ 4\pi \Big( 1 + \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)G(x-y,\delta k_0) \Big) }{i \delta^6 k_0^4 \omega ^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \mathbb{S}} \langle u_{in}, u_{\delta} \rangle \int_D u_{\delta}, \end{aligned}

which is the desired result.

Proposition

Proposition 2.10

YEKV

Let d=2 and \delta be small enough. Then, the o(\delta^4) approximation of the subwavelength resonant frequencies \omega _s of the halide perovskite nano-particle \Omega = \delta D + z satisfies

\begin{aligned} 1 - \delta^2 \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) \left( -\frac{|D|}{2\pi} \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) + \langle K^{(0)}_D[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_D \rangle + \delta^2 k_0^2 \log(\delta) \langle K^{(1)}_D[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D],\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D \rangle \Big) \right) = O\big( \delta^4 \big), \end{aligned}

where |D| is the volume of D and \hat{\mathbb{I}}_D = \mathbb{I}_D / \sqrt{|D|}.

Proof of Proposition 2.10

We want to find \omega _s \in \mathbb{C} such that

\begin{aligned} &\Big( I - \delta^2 \omega _s^2\xi(\omega _s,k_s) K^{\delta k_0}_D \Big)[u](x) = 0, \end{aligned}

which, for small \delta, can be written as

\begin{aligned} \Big( I - \delta^2 \omega _s^2\xi(\omega _s,k_s) \Big(&\log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) K^{(-1)}_D + K^{(0)}_D + (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) K^{(1)}_D\Big) \Big)[u](x) = O\Big(\delta^6 \log(\delta)\Big). \end{aligned}

Let us denote

M^{\delta k_0}_D := \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) K^{(-1)}_D + K^{(0)}_D + (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) K^{(1)}_D.

We take \nu(\delta) \in \sigma(M^{\delta k_0}_D) and consider the eigenvalue problem for M^{\delta k_0}_D:

\begin{aligned} M^{\delta k_0}_D[\Psi] = \nu(\delta) \Psi. \end{aligned}

We employ the ansatz

\begin{aligned} \Psi(\delta) &= \Psi_0 + O\left(\frac{1}{\log(\delta)}\right),\\ \nu(\delta) &= \log(\delta ) \nu_0 + \nu_1 + \delta^2 \log(\delta) \nu_2 + O\Big( \delta^2 \Big). \end{aligned}

From (Proof) and the fact that \delta^2\log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma })=\delta^2\log(\delta )+O(\delta^2) we have that

\begin{aligned} \Big( \log(\delta) K^{(-1)}_D + \log(k_0\hat{\gamma })K^{(-1)}_D + K^{(0)}_D &+ (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta) K^{(1)}_D \Big) [\Psi_0] = \\ &\Big( \log(\delta ) \nu_0 + \nu_1 + \delta^2 \log(\delta) \nu_2 \Big)[\Psi_0] + O\Big( \delta^2 \Big). \end{aligned}

Equating the O(\log \delta) terms gives

\begin{aligned} K^{(-1)}_D[\Psi_0] = \nu_0 \Psi_0 &\Rightarrow \nu_0 \hat{\mathbb{I}}_D = K^{(-1)}_D [\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D] \Rightarrow \nu_0 \hat{\mathbb{I}}_D = - \frac{|D|}{2\pi} \hat{\mathbb{I}}_D \Rightarrow \nu_0 = - \frac{|D|}{2\pi}. \end{aligned}

Then, equating the O(1) terms gives

\begin{aligned} \log(k_0 \hat{\gamma }) K^{(-1)}_D[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D] &+ K^{(0)}_D[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D] = \nu_1 \hat{\mathbb{I}}_D \Rightarrow \nu_1 \hat{\mathbb{I}}_D = - \frac{|D|}{2\pi} \log(k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \hat{\mathbb{I}}_D + K^{(0)}_D[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D] \\ &\Rightarrow \nu_1 = - \frac{|D|}{2\pi} \log(k_0 \hat{\gamma }) + \langle K^{(0)}_D[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_D \rangle. \end{aligned}

Using the same reasoning for the O\Big(\delta^2 \log(\delta)\Big) terms, we get

\begin{aligned} \nu_2 \hat{\mathbb{I}}_D = k_0^2 K^{(1)}_D[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D] \Rightarrow \nu_2 = k_0^2 \langle K^{(1)}_D[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D],\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D \rangle. \end{aligned}

Thus,

\begin{aligned} \nu(\delta) &= \log(\delta) \nu_0 + \nu_1 + \delta^2 \log(\delta) \nu_2 + O\Big( \delta^2 \Big)\\ &= -\frac{|D|}{2\pi} \log(\delta) - \frac{|D|}{2\pi} \log(k_0 \hat{\gamma }) + \langle K^{(0)}_D[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_D \rangle + \delta^2 k_0^2 \log(\delta) \langle K^{(1)}_D[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D],\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D \rangle + O\Big( \delta^2 ) \Big)\\ &= -\frac{|D|}{2\pi} \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) + \langle K^{(0)}_D[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_D \rangle + \delta^2 k_0^2 \log(\delta) \langle K^{(1)}_D[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D],\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D \rangle + O\Big( \delta^2 \Big). \end{aligned}

Using these expressions, 1 - \delta^2 \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) M^{\delta k_0}_D = O ( \delta^6 \log(\delta) ) can be rewritten as

\begin{aligned} &1 - \delta^2 \omega _s^2 \xi(\omega _s,k_s) \Big( -\frac{|D|}{2\pi} \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) + \langle K^{(0)}_D[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_D \rangle + \delta^2 k_0^2 \log(\delta) \langle K^{(1)}_D[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D],\hat{\mathbb{I}}_D \rangle\\ &\hspace{11cm} + O\Big( \delta^2 \Big) \Big) = O\Big( \delta^6 \log(\delta) \Big), \end{aligned}

from which the result follows.

Definition

Definition 3.1

U0YC

We define the integral operators K^{\delta k_0}_{D_i} and R^{\delta k_0}_{D_i D_j}, for i,j=1,2, by

\begin{aligned} K^{\delta k_0}_{D_i}: u\big|_{D_i} \in L^2(D_i) \longmapsto - \int_{D_i} G(x-y,\delta k_0) u(y) \mathrm{d} y \Big|_{D_i} \in L^2(D_i) \end{aligned}

and

\begin{aligned} R^{\delta k_0}_{D_i D_j}: u\big|_{D_i} \in L^2(D_i) \longmapsto - \int_{D_i} G(x-y,\delta k_0) u(y) \mathrm{d} y \Big|_{D_j} \in L^2(D_j). \end{aligned}
Used by Lemma 3.2
Lemma

Lemma 3.2

GH3T

The scattering problem (?) can be restated, using the Definition 3.1, as

\begin{aligned} \begin{pmatrix} 1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) K^{\delta k_0}_{D_1} & - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) R^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} \\ -\delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) R^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} & 1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) K^{\delta k_0}_{D_2} \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} u|_{D_1}\\ u|_{D_2} \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} u_{in}|_{D_1}\\ u_{in}|_{D_2} \end{pmatrix}. \end{aligned}
Uses Definition 3.1
Theorem

Theorem 3.3

43II

Let d=3. Then, the hybridized subwavelength resonant frequencies \omega satisfy

\Big(1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2\xi(\omega ,k)\lambda _{\delta}\Big)^2 - \delta^4 \omega ^4 \xi(\omega ,k)^2 \langle R^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} \phi_1^{(\delta)}, \phi_2^{(\delta)} \rangle \langle R^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} \phi_2^{(\delta)}, \phi_1^{(\delta)} \rangle = 0,

where \phi_i^{(\delta)}, for i=1,2, is the eigenfunction associated to the eigenvalue \lambda _{\delta} of the potential K^{\delta k_0}_{D_i}.

Used by Proof
Proof of Theorem 3.3

We observe that (?) is equivalent to

\begin{aligned} \begin{pmatrix} 1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) K^{\delta k_0}_{D_1} & 0 \\ 0 & 1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) K^{\delta k_0}_{D_2} \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} u_1\\ u_2 \end{pmatrix} - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \begin{pmatrix} 0 & R^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} \\ R^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} & 0 \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} u_1 \\ u_2 \end{pmatrix} = 0, \end{aligned}

which gives

\begin{aligned} \begin{pmatrix} u_1 \\ u_2 \end{pmatrix} - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \begin{pmatrix} \Big(1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) K^{\delta k_0}_{D_1}\Big)^{-1} & 0 \\ 0 & \Big(1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) K^{\delta k_0}_{D_2}\Big)^{-1} \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} R^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} u_2 \\ R^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} u_1 \end{pmatrix} =0. \end{aligned}

Let us now apply a pole-pencil decomposition on the operators \Big(1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) K^{\delta k_0}_{D_i}\Big)^{-1}, for i=1,2. We see that

\begin{aligned} \Big(1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) K^{\delta k_0}_{D_1}\Big)^{-1}(\cdot) = \frac{ \langle \cdot, \phi_1^{(\delta)} \rangle \phi_1^{(\delta)} }{1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \lambda _{\delta}} + R_1[\omega ](\cdot) \end{aligned}

and

\begin{aligned} \Big(1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) K^{\delta k_0}_{D_2}\Big)^{-1}(\cdot) = \frac{ \langle \cdot, \phi_2^{(\delta)} \rangle \phi_2^{(\delta)} }{1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \lambda _{\delta}} + R_2[\omega ](\cdot), \end{aligned}

where the remainder terms R_1[\omega ](\cdot) and R_2[\omega ](\cdot) are holomorphic for \omega in a neighborhood of \omega _{\delta}, so can be neglected. Then, (Proof), is equivalent to

\begin{aligned} \begin{pmatrix} u_1 \\ u_2 \end{pmatrix} - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \begin{pmatrix} \frac{ \langle \cdot, \phi_1^{(\delta)} \rangle \phi_1^{(\delta)} }{1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \lambda _{\delta}} & 0 \\ 0 & \frac{ \langle \cdot, \phi_2^{(\delta)} \rangle \phi_2^{(\delta)} }{1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \lambda _{\delta}} \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} R^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} u_2 \\ R^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} u_1 \end{pmatrix} =0. \end{aligned}

This gives us the system

\begin{aligned} \begin{cases} u_1 - \frac{\delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)}{1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \lambda _{\delta}} \langle R^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} u_2, \phi_1^{(\delta)} \rangle \phi_1^{(\delta)}=0,\\ u_2 - \frac{\delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)}{1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \lambda _{\delta}} \langle R^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} u_1, \phi_2^{(\delta)} \rangle \phi_2^{(\delta)}=0. \end{cases} \end{aligned}

Applying the operator R^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} (resp. R^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1}) to the first (resp. second) equation, and then applying \langle \cdot, \phi_2^{(\varepsilon)} \rangle (resp. \langle \cdot, \phi_1^{(\varepsilon)} \rangle), we find that

\begin{aligned} \begin{cases} \langle R^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} u_1, \phi_2^{(\delta)} \rangle - \frac{\delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)}{1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \lambda _{\delta}} \langle R^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} \phi_1^{(\delta)}, \phi_2^{(\delta)} \rangle \langle R^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} u_2, \phi_1^{(\delta)} \rangle =0,\\ \langle R^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} u_2, \phi_1^{(\delta)} \rangle - \frac{\delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)}{1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \lambda _{\delta}} \langle R^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} \phi_2^{(\delta)}, \phi_1^{(\delta)} \rangle \langle R^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} u_1, \phi_2^{(\delta)} \rangle =0. \end{cases} \end{aligned}

This system has a solution only if its determinant is zero. That is, if

\begin{aligned} 1 - \frac{ \delta^4 \omega ^4 \xi(\omega ,k)^2 }{\Big( 1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \lambda _{\delta} \Big)^2} \langle R^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} \phi_1^{(\delta)}, \phi_2^{(\delta)} \rangle \langle R^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} \phi_2^{(\delta)}, \phi_1^{(\delta)} \rangle = 0, \end{aligned}

which gives the desired result.

Corollary

Corollary 3.3.1

TXR8

Let d=3. Then, the hybridized subwavelength resonant frequencies are given by

\begin{gathered} \omega = \frac{i\gamma \pm \sqrt{-\gamma ^2 - 4 \Gamma(\beta + \eta k^2)}}{2 \Gamma}, \\ \text{where}\qquad\Gamma=-1-\delta^2\alpha \lambda _{\delta} \pm \alpha \delta^2 \sqrt{\langle R^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} \phi_1^{(\delta)}, \phi_2^{(\delta)} \rangle \langle R^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} \phi_2^{(\delta)}, \phi_1^{(\delta)} \rangle}. \end{gathered}

where \phi_i^{\delta}, for i=1,2, is the eigenfunction associated to the eigenvalue \lambda _{\delta} of the potential K^{\delta k_0}_{D_i} and the \pm in the two expressions do not have to agree.

Proof of Corollary 3.3.1

We introduce the notation \mathbb{K} := \langle R^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} \phi_1^{(\delta)}, \phi_2^{(\delta)} \rangle and \mathbb{M} := \langle R^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} \phi_2^{(\delta)}, \phi_1^{(\delta)} \rangle. Then, (3.3) becomes

\begin{aligned} \Big(1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2\xi(\omega ,k)\lambda _{\delta}&\Big)^2 - \delta^4 \omega ^4 \xi(\omega ,k)^2 \mathbb{K} \mathbb{M} = 0 \ \Leftrightarrow \ 1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2\xi(\omega ,k)\lambda _{\delta} \pm \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \sqrt{\mathbb{K}\mathbb{M}} = 0 \ \Leftrightarrow \\ &\left( -1-\delta^2\alpha \lambda _{\delta} \pm \alpha \delta^2 \sqrt{\mathbb{K}\mathbb{M}} \right) \omega ^2 - i\gamma \omega + \beta + \eta k^2 = 0, \end{aligned}

and the roots to this second degree polynomial are given by

\begin{aligned} \omega = \frac{i\gamma \pm \sqrt{-\gamma ^2 - 4 \Gamma(\beta +\eta k^2)}}{2 \Gamma} \quad \text{where}\quad \Gamma=-1-\delta^2\alpha \lambda _{\delta} \pm \alpha \delta^2 \sqrt{\mathbb{K}\mathbb{M}}, \end{aligned}

with the two \pm not necessarily agreeing. Finally, substituting the expressions for \mathbb{K} and \mathbb{M}, we obtain the result.

Uses Theorem 3.3
Definition

Definition 3.4

27GR

We define the integral operators M^{\delta k_0}_{D_i} and N^{\delta k_0}_{D_i D_j} for i,j=1,2 as

\begin{aligned} M^{\delta k_0}_{D_i} := \hat{K}^{\delta k_0}_{D_i} + K^{(0)}_{D_i} + (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) K^{(1)}_{D_i}, \end{aligned}

and

\begin{aligned} N^{\delta k_0}_{D_i D_j} := \hat{K}^{\delta k_0}_{D_i D_j} + R^{(0)}_{D_i D_j} + (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) R^{(1)}_{D_i D_j}, \end{aligned}

where

\begin{aligned} K^{(0)}_{D_i}: u\Big|_{D_i} \in L^2(D_i) &\longmapsto \int_{D_i} G(x-y,0)u(y)\mathrm{d} y \Big|_{D_i} \in L^{2}(D_i),\\ \hat{K}^{\delta k_0}_{D_i}: u\Big|_{D_i} \in L^2(D_i) &\longmapsto \log(\hat{\gamma } \delta k_0) \hat{K}_{D_i}[u]\Big|_{D_i}\in L^{2}(D_i), \\ \hat{K}_{D_i}: u\Big|_{D_i} \in L^2(D_i) &\longmapsto - \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{D_i} u(y) \mathrm{d} y \Big|_{D_i} \in L^{2}(D_i),\\ K^{(1)}_{D_i}: u\Big|_{D_i} \in L^2(D_i) &\longmapsto \int_{D_i} \frac{\partial}{\partial k} G(x-y,k)\Big|_{k=0} u(y) \mathrm{d} y \Big|_{D_i} \in L^2(D_i), \end{aligned}

and

\begin{aligned} R^{(0)}_{D_i D_j}: u\Big|_{D_i} \in L^2(D_i) &\longmapsto \int_{D_i} G(x-y,0)u(y)\mathrm{d} y \Big|_{D_j} \in L^{2}(D_j),\\ \hat{K}^{\delta k_0}_{D_i D_j}: u\Big|_{D_i} \in L^2(D_i) &\longmapsto \log(\hat{\gamma } \delta k_0) \hat{K}_{D_i D_j}[u]\Big|_{D_j}\in L^{2}(D_j), \\ \hat{K}_{D_i D_j}: u\Big|_{D_i} \in L^2(D_i) &\longmapsto - \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{D_i} u(y) \mathrm{d} y \Big|_{D_j} \in L^{2}(D_j),\\ R^{(1)}_{D_i D_j}: u\Big|_{D_i} \in L^2(D_i) &\longmapsto \int_{D_i} \frac{\partial}{\partial k} G(x-y,k)\Big|_{k=0} u(y) \mathrm{d} y \Big|_{D_j} \in L^2(D_j). \end{aligned}
Proposition

Proposition 3.5

M31J

For the integral operators K^{\delta k_0}_{D_i} and R^{\delta k_0}_{D_i D_j}, we can write

\begin{aligned} K^{\delta k_0}_{D_i} = M^{\delta k_0}_{D_i} + O\Big(\delta^4 \log(\delta)\Big), \quad \text{and} \quad R^{\delta k_0}_{D_i D_j} = N^{\delta k_0}_{D_i D_j}+ O\Big(\delta^4 \log(\delta)\Big), \end{aligned}

as \delta\to0 and with k_0 fixed.

Used by Proof
Proof of Proposition 3.5

The proof is a direct result of the expansion of the Green’s function in dimension d=2. Indeed, for u|_{D_i} \in L^2(D_i), we observe that

\begin{aligned} K^{\delta k_0}_{D_i}[u](x) &= - \int_{D_i} G(x-y,\delta k_0) u(y) \mathrm{d} y \Big|_{D_i}\\ &= -\int_{D_i} \Big( \log(\hat{\gamma } \delta k_0) \frac{1}{2\pi} + G(x-y,0) + (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \frac{\partial}{\partial k} G(x-y,k)\Big|_{k=0}\\ & \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ + O\Big(\delta^4 \log(\delta)\Big) \Big) u(y) \mathrm{d} y \Big|_{D_i}\\ &= \Big(\hat{K}^{\delta k_0}_{D_i} + K^{(0)}_{D_i} + (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) K^{(1)}_{D_i}\Big)[u](x) + O\Big(\delta^4 \log(\delta)\Big)\\ &= M^{\delta k_0}_{D_i}[u](x) + O\Big(\delta^4 \log(\delta)\Big). \end{aligned}

Similarly, for u|_{D_i} \in L^2(D_i),

\begin{aligned} R^{\delta k_0}_{D_i D_j}[u](x) &= - \int_{D_i} G(x-y,\delta k_0) u(y) \mathrm{d} y \Big|_{D_j} \in L^2(D_j)\\ &= -\int_{D_i} \Big( \log(\hat{\gamma } \delta k_0) \frac{1}{2\pi} + G(x-y,0) + (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \frac{\partial}{\partial k} G(x-y,k)\Big|_{k=0}\\ & \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ + O\Big(\delta^4 \log(\delta)\Big) \Big) u(y) \mathrm{d} y \Big|_{D_j}\\ &= \Big( \hat{K}^{\delta k_0}_{D_i D_j} + R^{(0)}_{D_i D_j} + (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) R^{(1)}_{D_i D_j} \Big)[u](x) + O\Big(\delta^4 \log(\delta)\Big)\\ &= N^{\delta k_0}_{D_i D_j}[u](x)+ O(\delta^4 \log(\delta)). \end{aligned}
Proposition

Proposition 3.6

TOE3

Let d=2. Then, the hybridized subwavelength resonant frequencies \omega satisfy

\begin{aligned} \begin{split} 1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) &\Big( -\frac{|D_1|}{2\pi} \log(\hat{\gamma } \delta k_0) (1 \pm 1) + \langle K^{(0)}_{D_1}[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1}], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle + (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \langle K^{(1)}_{D_1}[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1}], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle \\ &\pm \langle R^{(0)}_{D_2 D_1}[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2}], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle \pm (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \langle R^{(1)}_{D_2 D_1}[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2}], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle \Big) = 0, \end{split} \end{aligned}

where the \pm symbols coincide.

Proof of Proposition 3.6

The first thing that we do is to observe that, by applying the expansion (3.5) to (?), we reach the problem

\begin{aligned} \begin{pmatrix} I - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) M^{\delta k_0}_{D_1} & - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) N^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1}\\ - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) N^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} & I - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) M^{\delta k_0}_{D_2} \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} u_1 \\ u_2 \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} O\Big(\delta^4 \log(\delta)\Big)\\ O\Big(\delta^4 \log(\delta)\Big) \end{pmatrix}. \end{aligned}

We note that |D_1| = |D_2|. Then, using the symmetries of the dimer, let us denote

\begin{aligned} \hat{\nu}(\delta) :&= - \frac{|D_1|}{2\pi} \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) + \langle K^{(0)}_{D_1}[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1}], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle + (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \langle K^{(1)}_{D_1}[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1}], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle\\ &= - \frac{|D_2|}{2\pi} \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) + \langle K^{(0)}_{D_2}[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2}], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2} \rangle + (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \langle K^{(1)}_{D_2}[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2}], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2} \rangle, \end{aligned}

and

\begin{aligned} \hat{\eta } :&= \langle N^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} [\hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1}], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2} \rangle = \langle N^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} [\hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2}], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle. \end{aligned}

In addition, we have that

\begin{aligned} \hat{K}^{\delta k_0}_{D_i D_j}[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_i}] = \hat{K}^{\delta k_0}_{ D_j}[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_j}]. \end{aligned}

Now, we define the quantity \nu(\delta) to be the eigenvalues of the operator M^{\delta k_0}_{D_i}, that is,

\begin{aligned} \nu(\delta) = \langle M^{\delta k_0}_{D_1}[\Psi_{D_1}], \Psi_{D_1} \rangle = \langle M^{\delta k_0}_{D_2}[\Psi_{D_2}], \Psi_{D_2} \rangle, \end{aligned}

for the eigenfunctions \Psi_{D_i}(\delta) \in L^2(D_i), \Psi_{D_i}(\delta) = \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_i} + O\left( \frac{1}{\log(d)} \right). Thus, we have that (?) is equivalent to

\begin{aligned} \begin{pmatrix} u_1\\ u_2 \end{pmatrix} - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \begin{pmatrix} \Big( I - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)M^{\delta k_0}_{D_1} \Big)^{-1} & 0 \\ 0 & \Big( I - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)M^{\delta k_0}_{D_2} \Big)^{-1} \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} N^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} u_2\\ N^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} u_1 \end{pmatrix} =0. \end{aligned}

Applying a pole-pencil decomposition, we observe that

\begin{aligned} \Big( I - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)M^{\delta k_0}_{D_i} \Big)^{-1}[\cdot] = \frac{\langle \cdot, \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_i} \rangle \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_i}}{1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \nu(\delta)} + R[\omega ](\cdot), \end{aligned}

where the remainder terms R[\omega ](\cdot) can be neglected. Hence, (Proof) is equivalent to

\begin{aligned} \begin{cases} u_1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \frac{ \langle N^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} u_2, \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1}}{ 1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \nu(\delta) } = 0, \\ u_2 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \frac{ \langle N^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} u_1, \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2} \rangle \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2}}{ 1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \nu(\delta) } = 0, \end{cases} \end{aligned}

which is equivalent to

\begin{aligned} \begin{cases} \langle N^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} u_1, \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2} \rangle - \frac{\delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)}{1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)\nu(\delta)} \langle N^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1}, \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2} \rangle \langle N^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} u_2, \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle = 0,\\ \langle N^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} u_2, \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle - \frac{\delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)}{1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)\nu(\delta)} \langle N^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2}, \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle \langle N^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} u_1, \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2} \rangle = 0. \end{cases} \end{aligned}

For this to have a solution, we need the determinant of the matrix induced by this system to be zero.

This gives

\begin{aligned} &1 - \frac{\delta^4 \omega ^4 \xi(\omega ,k)^2}{( 1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)\nu(\delta) )^2} \langle N^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1}, \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2} \rangle \langle N^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2}, \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle = 0. \end{aligned}

Given the symmetry of our setting, we have that

\langle N^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1}, \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2} \rangle = \langle N^{\delta k_0}_{D_2 D_1} \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2}, \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle,

and hence, we get

\begin{aligned} 1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)\nu(\delta) \pm \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k)\langle N^{\delta k_0}_{D_1 D_2} \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1}, \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2} \rangle = 0. \end{aligned}

This is equivalent to

\begin{aligned} 1 - \delta^2 \omega ^2 \xi(\omega ,k) \Big( - \frac{|D_1|}{2\pi} \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma })(1\pm1) + &\langle K^{(0)}_{D_1}[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1}], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle + (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \langle K^{(1)}_{D_1}[\hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1}], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle\\ & \pm \langle R^{(0)}_{D_2 D_1} [\hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2}], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle \pm (\delta k_0)^2 \log(\delta k_0 \hat{\gamma }) \langle R^{(1)}_{D_2 D_1} [\hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_2}], \hat{\mathbb{I}}_{D_1} \rangle \Big) = 0, \end{aligned}

which is the desired result.

Uses Proposition 3.5

Source and licence

The text on this page is from arXiv:2202.07274v1 by Konstantinos Alexopoulos and Bryn Davies, under the licence CC BY 4.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY 4.0.

The record of each item is in analysis/objects/2202/2202.07274.jsonl.