Forward scattering is equivalent to no scattering.

the verdict

REFUTED

the evidence says no

Recorded sources

0 sources for · 2 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Is it true that Forward scattering is equivalent to no scattering?

No. Forward scattering is not equivalent to no scattering; in fact, the optical theorem relates forward scattering directly to total extinction, and specific beam configurations can even result in zero forward scattering while extinction remains strong.

Verdict: REFUTED · 0 sources for, 2 against · Last checked 5 Aug 2026

The analysis

The claim states that forward scattering is equivalent to no scattering. Physics literature on the optical theorem (e.g., Papers [3] and [10]) establishes that forward scattering is actually a distinct measure related to total extinction, and that objects can have zero forward scattering while still scattering and absorbing significantly overall (extinction). Thus, the claim is factually refuted by established scattering theory and optical theorems.

Evidence against · 2

Generalization of the optical theorem: experimental proof for radially polarized beams

2018

Get citation

Krasavin, A., Segovia, P., Dubrovka, R., Olivier, N., Wurtz, G., Ginzburg, P., & Zayats, A. (2018). Generalization of the optical theorem: experimental proof for radially polarized beams. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41377-018-0025-x

See more details

More against · 1

Inverse design of invisibility cloaks using the optical theorem

2021

Get citation

Slovick, B. & Hellhake, J. (2021). Inverse design of invisibility cloaks using the optical theorem. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1364/prj.450937

Related receipts

Is it true that if P then Q and Q only if P are logically equivalent statements? SUPPORTED related question, same topic
Is it true that the conditional 'if not p then q' is logically equivalent to 'p or q'? COMMON KNOWLEDGE related question, same topic

Receipt History

first checked05 Aug 2026

judged → REFUTED · 1905 Aug 2026

Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.

Check your own claim

Challenge the receipt

I have a source that contradicts this verdict I have a source that supports it No source: request a receipt review Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

See the evidence timeline

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work