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)]

TL;DR

This paper defends the validity of previous results on acoustic scattering cross sections, emphasizing their physical correctness and the importance of rigorous evidence over unsupported claims.

Contribution

It provides a rebuttal to claims questioning the validity of prior work on acoustic scattering cross sections, reaffirming their physical basis and scientific rigor.

Findings

Previous results are consistent with energy conservation.

The results are supported by rigorous methods and computational analysis.

Claims against the results lack supporting evidence.

Abstract

The aim of this note is to rebut some unsupported claims which cast suspicions on the results of the papers titled: "Extrinsic extinction cross-section in the multiple acoustic scattering by fluid particles," [J. Appl. Phys. 121, 144904 (2017)]; and "Intrinsic acoustical cross sections in the 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 the results presented in these works are entirely physical and valid, in complete agreement with the basic physical law of energy conservation. Moreover, scientific convincing results in peer-reviewed publications should be supported by illustrative examples using rigorous methods as well as computational analyses and solid conclusive evidence, instead of raising mere suspicions with baseless speculations.