Comment

Comment on The ‘Profound’ Experience of Seeing a New Color

majiks@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

Intertesting research, but it is not a colour. It is a human’s visual sensation created by giving the brain unusual inputs. If you take the same light and measure it spectrum, it is not new.

source

Sort:hotnew top

agent_nycto@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Ok but it’s a new experience that no one has had before. The only reason why the set of electromagnetic wavelengths is special is because it’s part of the human experience. So seeing something outside of that normal perception is arguably seeing a new color.

source
ianonavy@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Color is mostly a biological sensation. In low light, humans lose color acuity because rods are activated more than cones. Objects reflect the same wavelengths, but our cones can’t activate due to low energy. Does this mean color fades in low light? It depends on the physiology of the perceiver.

Humans have three color receptors peak-sensitive to red, green, and blue. Dogs have only two: yellow and blue. This means they can’t distinguish certain wavelengths. To dogs and colorblind humans, red and green look the same because their receptors are activated similarly. Color isn’t just a property of light; it’s a biological perceptual experience.

source
wkk@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Did you know we only experience pink as our red and blue cell receptors being stimulated at the same time? There is no pink wavelength.

source
- exocortex@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  Captain Obvious would like to chime in: (sorry 😅)
  
  Every color that we see is created by different types of receptors being stimulated together. A linear combination of three of these types. Arguably there isn’t really a wavelength that only stimulates one type of receptor exclusively as their absorbtion areas overlap - so it isn’t even that precise to call one receptor the “green” receptor as it sees a continuum of wavelength (of which a lot are also detected by the (so-called) “red” receptor.
  
  It’s a little egg-and-hen-problem with the naming here.a way out of it would be to only speak about spectra if it’s in the physical realm and color of its in the percetral realm.
  
  source
  - wkk@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    I saw the following meme the other day on that topic which I found amazing:
    
    shrimps have more cones because they’re dumb
    
    On the other hand I hope my point was clear about pink being perceived as a color when it doesn’t exist as a singular wavelength on the electromagnetic spectrum: something the person I was responding to was seemingly arguing that it invalidates what we might call a “color”. By his logic “pink” shouldn’t be considered a color, which I disagree with!
    
    source
  - FooBarrington@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    
    Every color that we see is created by different types of receptors being stimulated together. A linear combination of three of these types.
    
    What are you referring to as linear? AFAIK human perception is very much non-linear, which is why we have color spaces like OKLAB.
    
    source
- majiks@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  The whole point was that there is physical combination of wavelengths that induces pink sensation but there is none for this new olo, this is why i think it is not a property of light but purely a human sensation.
  
  source
codexarcanum@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Objects don’t “have” colors either, if we’re being pedantic. They reflect/absorb/transmit/emit different combinations of wavelengths. So “pink” objects just reflect some wavelengths that we classify as in the range of “red” and “blue”. Color is an interaction between emission, detection, and the brain’s interpretation.

Its not even a unique trick. The ears combine various wavelengths of air vibrations to create sound, with combinations of pure waves merging into distinct timbres (sometimes called “tonal color”).

source
JackbyDev@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
You say that, but Magenta is similar. It’s a unique reaction in our perception to two different wavelengths of light combining. Magenta is not in the rainbow.

source
- majiks@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  The whole point was that there is physical combination of wavelengths that induces pink sensation but there is none for this new olo, this is why i think it is not a property of light but purely a human sensation.
  
  source
  - JackbyDev@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    Yeah, that’s the entire point I’m making. In the same way magenta is not a single wavelength but a side effect of our perception, olo is an effect of stimulating individual types of cone cells instead of the eye as a whole.
    
    source