Colour

[mar_mar]

1 hour ago, swansont said:

I said physiology, not psychology. But the brain is involved in color perception.

Particle behavior does not require observation of the photon.

But in experiment with two slits observation makes electrons to behave like particles. 

12 minutes ago, studiot said:

Did you read the material I offered or am I wasting my time ?

 

 

 

If you come to the PHYSICS section of a scientific discussion forum like this one and start rabbitting on like this you can't imagine how quickly you will loose credibility.

I call the first quote trying to introduce religion by the back door and the second quote preaching religion.

I read the material. But how can you  measure the colour if it doesn't exist nowhere except your head! There is no true green, no true blue. Colour is subjective, everyone sees their own colors. I'm talking about the color, not about the light. 

I mentioned religious statements to explain my thought: there is nothing without human brain. 

 

[iNow]

20 minutes ago, studiot said:

am I wasting my time ?

Technically the OP is wasting everyones time, but I’m grateful they’ve confirmed it so quickly 

10 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

there is nothing without human brain. 

You were wrong the last time you said it, too. 

[mar_mar]

21 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Religious concepts and scientific concepts are not amenable to discussing together... they are immiscible.

Does something exist before receiving the name? 

[iNow]

13 hours ago, mar_mar said:

When you see green grass , you don't say that the grass reflects the wave of frequency 5.45 Hz

That’s right, bc the dominant wavelength of green is roughly 495–570 nm, so you’re off by a factor of a trillion 

2 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

Does something exist before receiving the name? 

Depends on the thing, but now you’re venturing into philosophy 

[mar_mar]

7 minutes ago, iNow said:

Technically the OP is wasting everyones time, but I’m grateful they’ve confirmed it so quickly 

You were wrong the last time you said it, too. 

Something exists because it was observed and realized. And this is ability of a human only. 

Edited November 27, 2023 by mar_mar

[iNow]

Not even wrong

[zapatos]

32 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

Does something exit before receiving the name?

I fear you lack a base level understanding of how the physical world works. Objective Permanence usually begins at about 8 months.

Quote

Objective permanence is an important cognitive milestone reached when your baby begins to understand that a toy, parent, or other familiar person or item still exists even if he can't see it. First discovered by a psychologist named Jean Piaget, object permanence means that your baby is starting to be able to imagine or "see" a person or thing in his mind, even if it's not there in front of him.

https://www.whattoexpect.com/first-year/playtime/object-permanence-in-babies/

[mar_mar]

3 minutes ago, zapatos said:

I fear you lack a base level understanding of how the physical world works. Objective Permanence usually begins at about 8 months.

https://www.whattoexpect.com/first-year/playtime/object-permanence-in-babies/

Do animals know that the sky is blue and the grass is green? They also observe these things.

[iNow]

4 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

Do animals know that the sky is blue and the grass is green? They also observe these things.

Which animals?

[mar_mar]

6 minutes ago, iNow said:

Which animals?

All animals which have ever existed. And I'm not talking about emotions and feelings, but concepts. 

[Phi for All]

35 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

Something exists because it was observed and realized. And this is ability of a human only. 

Do you think there was nothing existing before humans?

[studiot]

First you say

 

On 11/25/2023 at 11:41 PM, mar_mar said:

But frequency IS the colour. Because we observe it. We can't detach these concepts. 

and

14 hours ago, mar_mar said:

When you see green grass , you don't say that the grass reflects the wave of frequency 5.45 Hz, you say green grass. 

 

 

Then you say

14 hours ago, mar_mar said:

Colour doesn't have measurements

and

1 hour ago, mar_mar said:

I read the material. But how can you  measure the colour if it doesn't exist nowhere except your head! There is no true green, no true blue. Colour is subjective, everyone sees their own colors. I'm talking about the color, not about the light. 

 

If we ignore the typo in your statement of the frequency of green light, how is this not directly contradicting yourself ?

How is your (typo corrected) statement not a measurement ?

 

You say you read what I offered so you should have found out that I can set my computer screen to show a colour wash of 16 colours, 256 colours, 64 thousand colours and so on.

To do this I must have a measurement to instruct the computer circuitry to generate all these different colours.

In fact you should have found out that the standard measurement provides 3 numbers which are not frequencies.

This then enable me to generate the same colour on my screen as someone in Australia, if she gives me her 3 numbers.

 

So please do not tell me you cannot measure colour.

 

There are many other way to do this for other purposes.

 

Final question for you to think about

 

If I go out in the dark and illuminate my grass lawn with a strontium lamp, what colour will the grass appear to me ?

Edited November 27, 2023 by studiot
spelling

[TheVat]

Looks like the OP is more for a speculative philosophy thread.  Some sort of half-baked Berkleyian idealism, where the moon ceases to exist on a night when no one happens to be looking up.  Mar might want to look up quantum decoherence, if they are thinking QT somehow will provide a foundation for such a theory. 

[mar_mar]

4 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Do you think there was nothing existing before humans?

I don't mean timing, before/after. I'm talking about the principle.

This question of existence has been discussing over the centuries. But I thought that colour can answer this question. If I don't know the names of colours, what can I see? 

14 minutes ago, studiot said:

First you say

 

and

 

 

Then you say

and

 

If we ignore the typo in your statement of the frequency of green light, how is this not directly contradicting yourself ?

How is your (typo corrected) statement not a measurement ?

 

You say you read what I offered so you should have found out that I can set my computer screen to show a colour wash of 16 colours, 256 colours, 64 thousand colours and so on.

To do this I must have a measurement to instruct the computer circuitry to generate all these different colours.

In fact you should have found out that the standard measurement provides 3 numbers which are not frequencies.

This then enable me to generate the same colour on my screen as someone in Australia, if she gives me her 3 numbers.

 

So please do not tell me you cannot measure colour.

 

There are many other way to do this for other purposes.

 

Final question for you to think about

 

If I go out in the dark and illuminate my grass lwan with a strontium lamp, what colour will the grass appear to me ?

 

I confirm everything I said. Frequency IS the color, because it doesn't matter without the color. But color is subjective. Everybody see there own colors. And colors for your computer EXIST only because people AGREED on palettes and pixel dimensions. It's the product of a human mind. Also people agreed on time measurement, time zones, borders, etc. 

I'll think about your question. But I also have a question for you: what color have the night sky? And what are the measurements for this color? 

[pzkpfw]

Before humans existed, there were plants.

Are you saying those plants would not have reflected 555 nanometer wavelength light - just because there was no one there to give a name for what they perceive?

[mar_mar]

34 minutes ago, pzkpfw said:

Before humans existed, there were plants.

Are you saying those plants would not have reflected 555 nanometer wavelength light - just because there was no one there to give a name for what they perceive?

I think that when there were no humans, there were no observation, or I'd say awareness of the world. Do plants know that they reflect '555 nanometer wavelength light'? And in the experiment with two slits we saw that observation makes electrons behave like particle. If I understood this experiment correctly. 

Edited November 27, 2023 by mar_mar

[iNow]

4 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

when there were no humans, there were no observation, or I'd say awareness of the world

Repeat it all you want. It’s still wrong. 

1 hour ago, mar_mar said:

All animals which have ever existed.

Different animals have different visual capabilities. You’re gonna need to narrow it down a bit, or simply stop this silly trollish waste of time. 

[mar_mar]

1 minute ago, iNow said:

Repeat it all you want. It’s still wrong. 

What exactly is wrong?

 

 

[sethoflagos]

1 hour ago, mar_mar said:

But how can you  measure the colour if it doesn't exist nowhere except your head! There is no true green, no true blue. Colour is subjective, everyone sees their own colors. I'm talking about the color, not about the light.

What is the frequency of purple?

Purple (and all other hues) are purely constructs of the mind, and exist in the external environment only as approximate correlations with certain bands of emr.

The many records of inviduals with chromaesthesia who experience colour from sonic stimuli further strengthen this point of view.

  

[mar_mar]

24 minutes ago, iNow said:

 

Different animals have different visual capabilities. You’re gonna need to narrow it down a bit, or simply stop this silly trollish waste of time. 

Do animals have consciousness, the  gift of speech to describe the world? Do they observe the world? 

[studiot]

1 hour ago, mar_mar said:

I confirm everything I said. Frequency IS the color, because it doesn't matter without the color. But color is subjective. Everybody see there own colors. And colors for your computer EXIST only because people AGREED on palettes and pixel dimensions. It's the product of a human mind. Also people agreed on time measurement, time zones, borders, etc. 

Of course I gave you human references. References suitable to martians wouldn't be of much use would they ?

Is a reference to time an attempt to deflect attention from yourself ?

 

1 hour ago, mar_mar said:

I'll think about your question. But I also have a question for you: what color have the night sky? And what are the measurements for this color? 

The answer is #9e978e

 

Around the world, printers, artists, designers, textile companies and many more use the Pantone system of colour referencing.

Some companies even have their own special Pantone colour and are very jealous of anyone else using it.

The point is that if you are going to print, paint or otherwise put a design onto something such as a piece of paper, plastic, tea-shirts, packaging, company headed paper, you want the colour the be identical.

That is the point of the Pantone system.

https://www.pantone.com/color-systems/pantone-color-systems-explained

 

So are you going to answer my questions or not ?

 

 

Edited November 27, 2023 by studiot

[iNow]

24 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

Do animals have consciousness

I asked you to narrow it down. This does the opposite and expands it out. 

But my previous question applies here, too: Which animals?

[studiot]

One further consideration for those who think that 'colour' is determined by the frequency of some wave and nothing else.

 

Since this has been placed in quantum physics,

The frequencies of light produced by quantum processes is very tightly defined by the process.

So the spectral lines are the same if you are on Earth or Sirius or Alpha Centauri.

However because these places are moving at speed relative to each other each observer will observe the line produces by the others at a different frequency. This is known as the Galactic redshift.

The patterns of these lines are used for astronomical calibrations, but the absolute frequencies cannot be so used, only their shifts are significant.

[Phi for All]

3 hours ago, mar_mar said:

I think that when there were no humans, there were no observation, or I'd say awareness of the world.

This is what's wrong with your idea. Matter exists in lots of forms, and the life we see around us on Earth has evolved ways to sense those forms. Things have certain shapes, things have certain smells, and things have their own colors. The various species have developed various ways to sense the way matter has formed. 

It's not the other way around, where the universe is some blank slate that human consciousness alone imprints with meaning, sensibility, and texture. Organisms sense their environments, this is very basic.

[iNow]

He’s playing a slightly solipsistic silly semantic game whereby only a human calls it by the exact word “color” and a dog calls it “bark bark ruff ruff,” ergo “color” didn’t exist before humans etc. 

Just wasting time.