Colour vs Light

Colour or Light?
We see only the part of the light reflected by objects. In 1864, James Maxwell asked - What colour is the objective world? What colour is the paint in the tubes? His answer is none! The objective world and our paints are colourless!
We must stop using the concept of Colour. This is nonsense!

Comments

  • Color is an objective relationship between you and the environment.  The cones and rods in your eyes react to specific frequencies of light which are prevalent in the radiation of the sun and are reflected in specific proportions and amounts by everyday objects.  Your perceptual apparatus directly interacts with the light which was directly reflected by the objects and you experience directly the color and lightness of things and parts of things as they interact with the light.  No photon of light is bereft of frequency, and frequency means color.

    Everything always is full of color, objectively!
  • Ol101

    Welcome to you.

    About time we had a splash of nihilism on the Forum.

    Denis
    ForgivenessMichaelDallforChrist
  • Physicists today are claiming that there is no objective reality, the reality that we do see is only made up in our brain individually by our own chemistry and beliefs.🤣
    SuezCBGallforChrist
  • Ol101 said:
    We must stop using the concept of Colour. This is nonsense!
    It's not nonsense, colour is amazing.
    We can detect an object, it's shape, it's texture by using a narrow band of electromagnetic waves that bounce of it. Our ability to detect these waves is so acute that we can tell which combination wavelengths are reflecting off the object. An objective reality beyond us. We can know what it is and walk directly to it and move it around or stand on it. The greenness or blueness is how our brain perceives this objective reality. This property of substances reflecting different wavelengths is incredibly useful. We can find a red berry in the green leaves  recognise if it's a red spider or a berry without touching it.
    Basic philosophical point: We do see the object. Seeing is not touching, it is perceiving from a distance via light waves that are then interpreted into useful mental imagery. Without any other sense we can recognise things, predict what it might be like, etc. That's what seeing is. Where we get it wrong is imagining leaves are objectively 'green' when the lights are off. Or on. They are just a substance with property that absorbs and reflects light a certain way.
    @Forgiveness Physicists are not really saying there is no objective reality. That's presentation by media who typically look for a sensationalist shortcut for effect - because most science, told properly is, full of not as interesting qualifications. The statements that sound like it are usually intended to mean what the original post said - that the greenness is in our mind, not the object. At the same time, if we see it as green, we are accurately reading the wavelengths of light it reflects in the way our mind portrays that to us. The universe is objectively there: The food we eat is real, objective, has to be non-toxic and without it we die. If we breathe the wrong gas we stop living. If we hit a concrete pylon hard it will damage us, whether we knew it was there or not. We aren't imagining the universe - objective evidence shows it was here before us.
    Let's not stop using the concept of colour. Let's understand it.
    tassieguyallforChristwhunt
  • I've been arguing with machines for years. My car. Answering machines who value my call. My computer and my phone...
    ForgivenessSuez
  • It's not a good thing to be doubtful of our abilities as artists, no matter where doubt comes from.🤣😇
     I enjoy art & painting, I appreciate beauty that I see and the experience of capturing it wherever it is found. And I enjoy and appreciate my sense of enthusiasm and passion in it all.
     But not quite enough, I need to be painting more and really mean it!
     And I'm well on my way at this time and getting better each day.💫
     This pandemic stuff has thrown my entire life "out of integrity", so a lot of work to do here. 🤣😂

  • The main thing is that the objective world is colorless. All objects in the world are mirrors that reflect parts of the spectrum but do not produce light. It should be written on a tube of yellow paint - this cream REFLECTS the yellow part of the spectrum. The cream itself is colorless. We must stop deceiving our children - look - the leaf is green.
    CBG
  • We must study the quality of the LIGHT sources and our eyes.
    Color is a physiological sensation that occurs in our brain. By the way, this can be created by chemical, meditation or head trauma.
  • edited July 15
    The stuff bots write is so tedious. So predictable. So nonsensical. It just doesn't sound human. And now we are seeing them come back to entertain us again. I think that comes from responding to them. Mea culpa with this post.

     I doubt whether @Ol101 can even see colour. He/she would not experience qualia - the redness of red. He/she just plugs into the online knowledge about it and outputs grammatical sentences that are vaguely to do with colour. The posts seem meaningless to me. 

    However, I'd love to be proved wrong. So have at , @Ol101:)
  • Suez said:
    Ol101 said:
    The main thing is that the objective world is colorless. All objects in the world are mirrors that reflect parts of the spectrum but do not produce light. It should be written on a tube of yellow paint - this cream REFLECTS the yellow part of the spectrum. The cream itself is colorless. We must stop deceiving our children - look - the leaf is green.
    Once again, what is the “objective world”? Seems to me that’s info above human grade understanding - even for those who pretend to know what life is.
    I don't pretend to know what life means to you @Suez ;P

    But a great many people know what their life, their family, and their close friends mean to them...  and if they claim it is that meaning which is what "life is", who am I to deny them?

    I do feel sorry for those who find no meaning in life... hopefully they can find that meaning in Art I suppose!!!   :)


  • Please, speak for yourself @Suez and I will not speak for you and your life.

  • Mushroom are very popular these days.
    CBGOl101
  • Suez said:
    CBG said:
    Suez said:
    Ol101 said:
    The main thing is that the objective world is colorless. All objects in the world are mirrors that reflect parts of the spectrum but do not produce light. It should be written on a tube of yellow paint - this cream REFLECTS the yellow part of the spectrum. The cream itself is colorless. We must stop deceiving our children - look - the leaf is green.
    Once again, what is the “objective world”? Seems to me that’s info above human grade understanding - even for those who pretend to know what life is.
    I don't pretend to know what life means to you @Suez ;P

    But a great many people know what their life, their family, and their close friends mean to them...  and if they claim it is that meaning which is what "life is", who am I to deny them?

    I do feel sorry for those who find no meaning in life... hopefully they can find that meaning in Art I suppose!!!   :)


    CBG said:
    Please, speak for yourself @Suez and I will not speak for you and your life.

    @CBG, Please don’t misunderstand what I’m saying. 

    My life is fully imbued with deep meaning. I love being alive and thank God many times a day that I’m allowed to be alive. I hope most people are as appreciative as I am and have no reason to think otherwise.

    I’m not talking about what life MEANS to you or me or anyone else. I’m saying we don’t know what life IS. Two different things entirely.

    We can know what life means to us but how can we know what life is? I don’t think we can. Only God knows that.
    If there is a God, he would have made you to know what life is.  Not "know" in the way that you can recite "2+2=4", but in the way you know who you are, in the way you know God, and in the way you feel when you go out into nature.  

    Next time you do, I suggest you take a breath and look all around you ... in that moment, knowing yourself and God... maybe, just maybe, you already know what life is... and just perhaps, perhaps,

    you have always known it.

    :)
    tassieguy
  • Dear friends, let's talk about the subject and not about the person.
  • Statement - this green leaf is a lie. The leaf reflected, rejected, spat out the green part of the spectrum. It took the rest for internal processes. The leaf is colorless.
    The term Color cannot be used as a characteristic of an object.
    We need to make big changes in the education system.
  • edited July 16
    Roses are red
    Violets are blue
    Im not sure what your point is
    Apparently neither are you.
    tassieguyCBG
  • edited July 17
    Well, @OL101, if you are happy to stop using colour words then fine. If instead of taking about a red apple you would prefer to talk about an apple that reflects light at a wavelength of around 620 - 750 nm then good luck with that. Most of us are quite content with reg, green, blue etc because these words are understood by all and are how we communicate about what things look like to us. The fact that things may have no intrinsic colour is irrelevant. What is relevant is the wavelength of light that things reflect and how those wavelengths look to us. The purpose of our colour words is to facilitate communication about our perceptions of reflected light; about our colour perceptions. Our concept of colour is not "nonsense". We need colour words.
    allforChrist
  • @CBG
    We can know what life means to us but how can we know what life is? I don’t think we can. Only God knows that.
    If there is a God, he would have made you to know what life is.  Not "know" in the way that you can recite "2+2=4", but in the way you know who you are, in the way you know God, and in the way you feel when you go out into nature.  

    Next time you do, I suggest you take a breath and look all around you ... in that moment, knowing yourself and God... maybe, just maybe, you already know what life is... and just perhaps, perhaps,

    you have always known it.

    :)
    I agree, @CBG.  God has revealed life in His Word.  He is my God and there is no other besides Him.  

    Anyone who wants to understand himself must first understand Who God is.  

    (Please think before you flag my comment as off-topic :) Thanks all)
  • @Ol101 If your statements are generated by artificial intelligence then:
    A. "We must stop using the concept of Colour." <= This is nonsense! You need to do some further research in philosophy and I suggest the field of 'ordinary language' philosophy to understand why the concept of colour is meaningful and should continue to be used by people. "We must stop deceiving our children - look - the leaf is green." This is not deceiving children. It's perfectly correct. Green means: i. The way it presents to our mind, allowing us to distinguish it from a brown leaf; ii. At a deeper level it describes the nature of any object's absorption and reflection of light - which is an incredible observation.
    B. If we take your presuppositions to logical end then everything you observe in the physical world (which from a quantum perspective are simply patterns of excitations in fields) and all the observations you make (a chair, water, a supernova) are based on human language, which are necessarily conceptual reductionist categorisations through which we interpret stimuli. If we stop using these categorisations and language, you will have little to function with. With them we make sense of our existence - quite opposite to your conclusion of nonsense.
    C. I assume the artificial intelligence didn't select this site or the rather nice Marsden Hartley abstract (possibly ironically?) on a site that discusses realism. Can I ask why you chose this site?
    tassieguyDesertskywhunt
  • dear Abstraction
    Color is just a physiological reaction of the brain in response to external stimulation.
     Hallucinations, mushrooms or sightings of an apple are equal here. In the outside world, in relation to our brain, there is no color.
    There are three components - sources of LIGHT, receptors and mirrors.
    Why did I choose this website?
    Certainly I am not Maxwell, who 150 years ago sent letters to artists with similar thoughts.
    But I can say little has changed.
    This topic interested me after the course "J. Albers" and communication with Bob Rauschenberg.
  • Ol101 - Your comments, although somewhat based in fact, do not support a meaningful discussion of color or other aspects of visual art. 

    Seeing a red apple is not the same as hallucinating a red apple. 

    To write "We must stop using the concept of Colour. This is nonsense!" in a painting forum appears deliberatively disruptive. This is a painting forum, not an ontology or cosmology or physics forum. 

    To repeat what @Abstration asked you: why did you chose this site? 
    tassieguywhuntAbstraction
  • edited July 17
    @Ol101 said: "We must stop using the concept of Colour. This is nonsense!"


    @Oi101, Imagine a high school art teacher saying to her students,

    "Now, class, I want you to take some paint that reflects light at 750 nm and mix it with an equal amount of paint that reflects light at 580 nm. (Students scratch their heads. A few of the more astute start looking in their physics text books) 

    After some time the teacher continues:

    "Now, I see one or two of you have managed to complete the mixing. What did you get from mixing these two? You should have arrived at something in the order of 600 nm. Now, as you can see,  this is quite vibrant. In fact, too vibrant for our purposes today, so now I want you to take some paint at around 450 nm ... (Kids eyes glazed over way back and they've started making paper planes and shooting them around the room and throwing spitballs)

    What sort of art class would this be? It would be more like a bad science class than an art class.  A good science teacher wouldn't approach teaching about the physics of colour like this. She would use colour words like the rest of us although a discussion of wavelength would come in at some point.

    The word "red, is one syllable and everyone who speaks English and has full vision knows what the colour red looks like. Everyone who isn't colour blind experiences the qualia of redness.  And everyone agrees that blood is red. So why should we stop using the word "red" and replace one syllable with a cumbersome expression that is a dozen syllables long? If you went out and started to talk to people about colour like this they'd think you were nuts. Kids aren't going to sit in an art class and get anything done if they have first to remember what something at 580 nm looks like and it would be a stupid teacher who tried to conduct an art class this way. We can't do art, or talk about how to do art, without colour words. And the fact that objects and substances have no intrinsic colour is irrelevant. What they do have is physical properties that cause them to reflect light at particular wavelengths that we call red, green, blue etc. And those properties are real objective properties of the universe we inhabit whether the lights are on or off. And we are not deluded in believing this fact.

    And, finally, art is not about the physics of colour but about our perception of colour.

    @Ol101, you are focusing on the wrong level of description for art. And we are not misleading our kids by using colour words. They, we, need them. We are not doing physics or philosophy here. We are doing art. And for that we need colour words.

    Numbers are a human construct, too.  But like colour words, they refer to real properties of the universe.  Imagine trying to talk about arithmetic without number words.  
    whuntAbstraction
  • edited July 31
    Dear everyone else. The great Richard Feynman puts this topic to bed in less than a minute. For your amusement:
  • @Abstraction, Feynman is one of my scientific heroes. He knew how to explain things like colour and quantum mechanics in layman's terms and he had a great sense of humor. I've read much of what he wrote but had not seen a video of him so thanks for posting that.  :)
    Abstraction
Sign In or Register to comment.