Talk:Scattering cross-section

"This can be seen when driving in foggy weather: the droplets of water (which form the fog) scatter red light less than they scatter the shorter wavelengths present in white light, and the red rear fog light can be distinguished more clearly than the white headlights of an approaching vehicle."

Comparison of red and white light is not very meaningful, since white light is a wide spectrum of light. A more meaningful test would be to see if red is better visible through a foggy medium than green or blue lamps. Also, white headlights are most likely harder to see because the background (the fog) is also "white" (due to the roughly wavelength-independent scattering by the water droplets in fog) so that there is less color contrast than in the case of red light on white fog. Mill haru (talk) 15:35, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Radar etc?

Any way to broaden this article to include the use of the concept for radar energy reflection and optical retroreflectors, where the area values are enormous? What is the physical significance of those large area values? An explanation for neutron resonance is that the interaction makes the nucleus appear much larger. What would be the cross section value for a unit white (or gray) surface reflector?165.121.80.238 (talk) 07:18, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Scattering cross-section / Differential cross section

Hello, I think the two concepts above should not be linked. One can define a differential cross section for others processes than scattering (ctrl+F in Evans, The Atomic Nucleus for example). I have no time to create a new article right now. --Tryonisos (talk) 12:59, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Intro far too specific

"The scattering cross-section is a hypothetical area which describes the likelihood of light or other radiation being scattered by a particle" In my experience, the basic application considered for scattering is Rutherford scattering of alpha particles or electrons from atoms or nuclei, of course it also applies to radiation but it's far more general than that. 130.63.110.250 (talk) 18:35, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal: merge into Cross section (physics)

I don't see why there should be two articles talking about what is essentially the same quantity. Right now, the information is haphazardly split between the two articles, with lots of duplication. Both articles could really use a bit of an overhaul in terms of layout and content (they are rather unfriendly to the beginners), but merging them would be a good start. --Fylwind (talk) 04:57, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merged. --Fylwind (talk) 06:02, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]