About the thread "The color that doesn't exist"

[trogluddite]

And not true.

I only asked questions, made multi-choice suggestions, and stated a personal opinion - there were no truth statements for anyone to contradict (on purpose!)

We have receptors for red, green and blue!

We have receptors for quantum objects containing certain specific amounts of energy. Even calling them "particles" or "waves" cannot really be the physical truth, as those intuitive models are contradictory; but they're convenient labels because, depending which experiment you do, they can exhibit the properties of either. Red, green, blue, etc. are similar "convenient labels", just intuitive categories (not independent physical properties) into which humans might sort these quantum objects, based on their subjective correlation with the perceptual effects which gave rise to the names in the first place. The map is not the territory.

without light you won't see a color...

I promise you, I have never seen total blackness, even though I used to be a caver, so have been in plenty of places where photons of visible light cannot reach. And that's when I'm not having a migraine!

Of course "redness" is a property of red light!

Yes, tautologies have a habit of being trivially true like that!

Since this has now degenerated...

Indeed. The mods around here have got quite enough on their plate with the spammers - I don't mind a bit of banter, but lets try to keep the ranting in check, please, folks.

[k brown]

Ranting in Check - I'll have to borrow that as my user name somewhere.

[Spogg]

This is my take on the discussion guys.

What I think tulamide is saying is that many colours that we automatically create qualia from require more than one wavelength of light to be mixed. In this way Magenta cannot be specified by a single wavelength. It’s the mixture of wavelengths, the recipe if you like, that somehow causes our subjective experience. The means by which the huge network of neurons achieves this is called the Hard Problem of Consciousness, and it fascinates me that something we all experience has literally no explanation. But these qualia can be said to “exist” because they are real to us, and the recipe for initiating them can be described by physics.

A blind physicist could use apparatus which would analyse the spectrum, the mix of wavelengths, and if she was told the results could, in theory, say “That will be seen as magenta” for example, without ever having experienced magenta herself.

Here’s another example relating to sound:
“What’s the saddest musical pitch?” Of course there are none.
But when you mix some notes together you would probably decide that a minor triad is more melancholic than a major triad. It’s this mixture of sonic wavelengths that causes our brains to create the qualia.

And now I go into brace position…

Cheers

Spogg

[k brown]

Brace Position - I think I'll borrow that as my cowboy name.

Which reminds me (wildly off topic) - has there ever been a poll here of where most forum members are located; I get the impression that those of us in the US are in the minority. Related to that, almost all the e-mails I get via my synth website are from Germany or the UK. Are soft-synths wildly more popular 'across the pond' than here in the USofA? Or is it FS that's more popular 'over there'?