Further comments on Mark Stockman's article "Criterion for Negative Refraction with Low Optical Losses from a Fundamental Principle of Causality"

We clarify the claims and errors in the paper "Criterion for Negative Refraction with Low Optical Losses from a Fundamental Principle of Causality" by Mark Stockman. Contrary to the central assertion in that paper, simple examples consistent with the basic inequality which Stockman discovered show that it is possible to have negative refraction and low loss in an arbitrarily large frequency window. Further examination of the paper reveals additional errors that invalidate his argument that active materials cannot have low loss and negative refraction in a frequency window. Also, we point out that for active materials non-analyticity of the electrical permittivity in the upper half complex frequency plane does not necessarily imply noncausality, as Stockman infers.