Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: [OT] Scientists discover new colour
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 17:12:57 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <vubl4p$3ud1u$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vtug48$3gf8q$3@dont-email.me> <vu58un$3c1k5$2@paganini.bofh.team>
 <677312190.767069883.065950.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>
 <i91h0klnjrqjki4rc9adnpb44cc4pa0nfd@4ax.com>
 <1922648230.767119320.102520.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>
Reply-To: nobody@nowhere.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 23:12:57 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="bc481360dd275c977bba01f14259dd24";
	logging-data="4142142"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX195/J4wBDaeePkRfsH9HWOhbQfcTFVZTWQ="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:KR5H5NBbzNF1HFnGPLhvnxmEXeM=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <1922648230.767119320.102520.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>
Bytes: 3511

On 4/23/2025 12:47 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
> shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 20:02:18 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
>>>> Rhino wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Discover" may not be the right word: "generated" is probably closer.
>>>>> This article explains:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/apr/18/scientists-claim-to-have-found-colour-no-one-has-seen-before
>>>>
>>>> I remember seeing claims that ancients did not see blue, whatever that means.
>>>>
>>>
>>> There’s a harebrained hippie dippy, long hair, loose tooth vegan theory
>>> that you don’t see a color until you have a name for it. So you don’t see
>>> blue at all until somebody tells you the word blue and then suddenly blue
>>> magically appears. We were actually taught this in college. You also don’t
>>> see variations until somebody gives you adjectives. So primitive man saw
>>> the entire jungle as one mass of a solid green color with no dark or lights
>>> or yellow green or blue greens or anything. Need I add that the people that
>>> believe this are maroons?
>>
>> Of course people saw colors all along. What they didn't have was a way
>> to describe what they saw. So I might imagine people before there was
>> the word "blue" might not have differentiated the various shades of
>> the color but still noticed it. Maybe they called it sky colored or
>> water colored (if they lived near an ocean/clear blue lake.)
>>
> 
> But that’s not what they taught us. They taught us that you don’t perceive
> color until you have a word for it. I can only hope that the college TAS
> were just so stupid they got it wrong.

Iirc (and I may not), the eye's 'red' and 'green' color-receptors detect 
those wavelengths directly, and correspondingly paint the respective 
areas of the perceived visual field.  However, because there are no 
receptors for the wavelength we see as yellow, that color is a "lie" 
constructed by the brain wherever it receives *both* red and green 
stimuli.  (Fwiw -- and with apologies to Alice Walker -- I've recently 
read something similar about the color purple.)