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
Explore connections, maps & timelines
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.