arXiv · 1310.5888
Reply to the Comment on "A self-assembled three-dimensional cloak in the visible" in Scientific Reports 3, 2328
Abstract
In a recent comment arxiv:1310.1503 Miller et al. noted that a cloak we previously presented (Scientific Reports 3, 2328) that exploits a scattering cancellation technique to render an optically small dielectric particle invisible suffers from increased extinction. According to Miller et al. this disqualifies the terminology of a cloak. We concur with the crux of the comment but wish to stress that we never claimed nor suggested a reduction in extinction. A scattering cancellation cloak cancels scattering. The issue, therefore, seems to be whether the structure should be called a cloak or not. We understand a cloaked object as an object that is not perceived by an external observer. We argue that optically small particles are much easier seen in a scattering configuration whereas it is difficult to perceive them in extinction; providing justification to the terminology as used.
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
S. Mühlig, A. Cunningham, J. Dintinger, M. Farhat, S. Bin Hasan, T. Scharf, T. Bürgi, F. Lederer, C. Rockstuhl. 2013-10-22. Reply to the Comment on "A self-assembled three-dimensional cloak in the visible" in Scientific Reports 3, 2328. https://arxiv.org/abs/1310.5888
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.