English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The aim of this note is to rebut some unsupported claims which castsuspicions on the results of the papers titled: "Extrinsic extinctioncross-section in the multiple acoustic scattering by fluid particles," [J.Appl. Phys. 121, 144904 (2017)]; and "Intrinsic acoustical cross sections inthe multiple scattering by a pair of rigid cylindrical particles in 2D," [J.Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 50, 325601 (2017)]. It is important to emphasize that theresults presented in these works are entirely physical and valid, in completeagreement with the basic physical law of energy conservation. Moreover,scientific convincing results in peer-reviewed publications should be supportedby illustrative examples using rigorous methods as well as computationalanalyses and solid conclusive evidence, instead of raising mere suspicions withbaseless speculations.

Reply to: "Section IV. G. Mitri's cross sections" in the paper titled  "Multiple scattering and scattering cross sections" [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 143,  995 (2018)]