Color Vision

[Anonymous No.15701954]

Tell me about Magenta, how come it is a color that doesn't have a measurable wavelength and isn't on the spectrum yet we can see it? Is it just our brain going schizo and that ends up in this color?

[Anonymous No.15701957]

>>15701954
Colors are not wavelengths, they are distributions over wavelengths.

[Anonymous No.15701976]

There are three kinds of receptors, low, mid and high, if 2 neighbours are activated, you can point to the part of the spectrum that would do that. If all 3 are activated, that's white. If 2 non-neighbours are activated that's magenta. It's not schizo any more than white.

[Anonymous No.15701985]

>>15701976
>It's not schizo any more than white.
ok, show me another color that doesn't have a corresponding wavelength "out there". if magenta isn't so special.

[Anonymous No.15701987]

>>15701985
White, there is no third one.

[Anonymous No.15701989]

>>15701985
He won't, literally the only argument those brainlets have is "muh white, muh black, muh brown" even though the two formers are achromatic colors and the latter is literally just dark orange

Magenta is the shit, we have to study it.

[Anonymous No.15702000]

>>15701987
>>15701989
>white
>black
hmm. well, technically there's no photons with those wavelengths. damn.
all three are special in their own way.

[Anonymous No.15702002]

>>15701985
Lavender

[Barkun No.15702004]

Magenta proves determinism.

[Anonymous No.15702008]

>>15702004
how so? elaborate anon

[Anonymous No.15702009]

>>15701985
>greentext

[Anonymous No.15702012]

>>15702009
>>greentext
This is called a "quote", anon.

[Anonymous No.15702015]

>>15702002
>UV-A
I think I played with 405nm and red lasers and still got some magenta looking color.

[Anonymous No.15702017]

greentext isn't allowed, green is the opposite of magenta, it's banished in this fine thread!

[Anonymous No.15702020]

>>15702017
he doesn't know about Tomorrow

[Anonymous No.15702021]

>>15702012
It's a color and it ain't got a wavelength tho

[Anonymous No.15702031]

>>15701954
it's supposed to be red and blue combined at full intensity but for some reason it look oddly closer to red than blue

[Anonymous No.15702037]

>>15702031
Well, in RGB the three colors all have different intensity, Green is the most luminous, Red is the second luminous and Blue is the least luminous, if Blue and Red combine then the Red color will be more dominant and hence why Magenta look "closer" to Red than Blue

[Anonymous No.15702049]

>>15702037
btw white and magenta have intensity, black doesn't. whatever is not black means it's something else extra over black.

[Anonymous No.15702051]

>>15701954
>Is it just our brain going schizo and that ends up in this color?
Yeah pretty much.

>magenta isn't real
>white, black and grey aren't real either
>blue-green colors are nearly grey
>you can't see pure green
>red and green are nearly the same color anyway

[Anonymous No.15702056]

>>15701954
there's a reason why it's the color used for missing textures in video games

[Anonymous No.15702136]

>>15701954
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NzVmtbPOrM

[Anonymous No.15702142]

>>15701954
light magenta is pink, dark magenta is purple

[Anonymous No.15703667]

>>15701985
Brown

[Anonymous No.15703676]

>>15701954
>how come it is a color that doesn't have a measurable wavelength and isn't on the spectrum yet we can see it?
Because your eyes have three types of photoreceptor cells with peak reactions for different wavelengths, not a fucking spectrometer. You may just be on a spectrum yourself.

[Anonymous No.15703683]

On the other hand, violet exists in the spectrum but cannot be reproduced by a monitor. It just gives you dark magenta instead.

[Anonymous No.15703685]

>>15703683
>[name of color we can see] exists on the spectrum but can't be reproduced by [device with output perceived as that color]
4chan is literally a bunch of GPTs.

[Anonymous No.15703693]

>>15703685
But you aren't seeing violet on the monitor. Take a picture of a rainbow, then compare it to the rainbow with your own eyes.
Red + Blue does not trigger the eye the same as Violet. The Red invariably brings some Green triggering into the mix which does not belong there.

[Anonymous No.15703696]

>>15703693
>But you aren't seeing violet on the monitor.
The monitor produces a stimulus that invokes the color we call "violet". I do, in fact, see violet on the monitor. It's just that you're such a fucking bot you think colors are wavelengths.

[Anonymous No.15703725]

>>15703696
When you look at the monitor, you see red and blue. This almost gives the illusion of violet, but not quite. The Red pixel triggers your green sensing cones more than a little bit. This doesn't happen with real violet.
Why are you so assured that a mere three pixels is enough to simulate every color stimulus?

[Anonymous No.15703733]

>>15703725
>you see red and blue.
Wavelengths associated with red and blue hit my retina and I see violet. Even a GPT should be able to learn this concept. lol

[Anonymous No.15703741]

>>15703733
Your red cones are triggered
And your blue cones are triggered
And this loosely approximates the way violet triggers both of these, but not quite, because there is some spillover.

[Anonymous No.15703749]

>>15703741
>And this loosely approximates the way violet triggers both of these
It doesn't "loosely approximate" anything. It makes us humans see a shade of color that falls under what we humans call violent. There is no one precise shade that is "violet". Do you understand now, you literal bot?

[Anonymous No.15703753]

Causes me to compare vision to hearing. There is also no 'trumpet' frequency. Is a piano chord a better analogue? Seems like there's some yin-yang; the brain is better at synthesizing audio of multiple frequencies into a distinct timbre/sound, but better at synthesizing vision of different spatial locations into a silhouette.

[Anonymous No.15703757]

>>15703753
>the GPT breaks and goes fully incoherent

[Anonymous No.15703778]

>>15703757
humans can hear wavelengths spanning a factor of 1,000, yet only have 2 ears. humans have a gazillion rods/cones, yet can only see frequencies spanning a factor of 2. i dont think its an insane observation.

[Anonymous No.15703790]

>>15703778
Holy fucking schizophrenia incarnate.

[Anonymous No.15703791]

>>15703778
>only have 2 ears
Speak for yourself, earlet.

[Anonymous No.15704033]

>>15701954
Colors have nothing and I mean nothing to do with wavelengths. Colors are qualia.
Next time try dreaming in color to confirm this.
Saying colors are related to wavelengths is as retarded a mindless take as saying anime girlhood is based on the jpg file format.

[Anonymous No.15704051]

>>15704033
Colors are related to wavelengths. Only retards will deny.

[Anonymous No.15704068]

>>15701954
I was talking to family abou lt this but tell me about the color Red, women of /sci/. Men, tell me about White. I’ll tell you about Blue winkwink before I get banned for talking about colors.

[Anonymous No.15704479]

>>15704051
Explain the mystery of Magenta then, im waiting, oh wait you're just gonna cry that it's blue and red mixed without explaining why it can't be measured by wavelength, asshole

[Anonymous No.15704480]

>>15704479
I bet I can probably blast your retina with any old wavelength and make you see magenta because colors are not related to wavelengths. Oh, wait, that's wrong, you fucking retard.

[Anonymous No.15704625]

>>15701954
your eyes receive red and blue at the same time. what color to show? its not red and its not blue.
your brain just kind of makes something up

the only reason this seems weird is because many combinations of colors do end up landing on the normal color spectrum. Red + Green makes yellow for example. This one just seems weird because it lands outside of any real wavelength

[Anonymous No.15704644]

>>15704625
Ok, you still haven't explained the mystery, lazy nerd.

[Anonymous No.15704648]

>>15704644
what would you like me to explain

[Anonymous No.15704660]

>>15701957
wrong, they're resonations over distributions over wavelengths. I know, because I read a book you didn't read.

[Anonymous No.15704666]

>>15704648
why your penis is so small.

[Anonymous No.15704670]

>>15704660
wrong, they're resonations over distributions over wavelengths over genders. homo

[Anonymous No.15706018]

>>15704670
AHAHAHAHAAHHAHA
Wow you're so funny, anon! Tell us another one!

[Anonymous No.15706179]

"Magenta isn't real!" Or "Pink isn't real!" Or "Brown isn't real!" Seems to be a staple topic of pop-sci channels. And in pop-sci tradition, its fudging the truth to be "mind blowing" or whatever rather than informative.

The roy-g-biv spectral colors only describe what the human eye would see if it was hit by perfectly sinusoidal waves of varying wavelengths. Sinusoidal waves are just a mathematical tool and they rarely occur in nature. Sure, you can get something close by shining white light through a glass prism onto a white surface, but thats not the point.

Rapidly oscillating pushing and pulling electromagnetic force (i.e. light) can have any funky waveform it wants. If light hits the surface of a marshmellow, the molecules on the surface are going to bounce around in a certain way specific to the chemical makeup of the marshmellow. The oscillating EM force of those molecules bouncing around is going to be shaped in a way that stimulates red and blue, but not green, photopigment molecules in our eyes. Therefore, making the marshmellow pink.

All colors that can be experienced by human's 3-pronged vision interpretation are no more real or abstract than each other. They are all abstractions. Its really not a mystery or all that "mind blowing".

[Anonymous No.15706218]

>>15706179
>All colors that can be experienced by human's 3-pronged vision
colors are made up by the brain. they do not exist. only photons of certain wavelength exist in the pure sense of existing. what you "see" is not what is out there, it's an interpretation of your brain based on input info (from senses).

[Anonymous No.15706266]

>>15701954
>how come it is a color that doesn't have a measurable wavelength and isn't on the spectrum yet we can see it?
The vast majority of visible colors aren't on the spectrum.
Pink isn't, White isn't, Brown isn't.
Even the 7 colors of rainbow aren't on the spectrum anymore the moment they're even slightly desaturated.

[Anonymous No.15706367]

>>15701954
Photon Spin Polarity.

Magenta is a photon moving with an equal wavelength to green but with an inverted spin.

[Anonymous No.15706386]

i always assumed that magenta had a shorter wavelength than violet, but you little cucks only keep confusing me more

[Anonymous No.15706420]

How is this possible

[Anonymous No.15706894]

>>15706218
>photons of certain wavelength exist in the pure sense of existing.
These are also made up. It's a metaphor

[Anonymous No.15706896]

>>15706266
Brown is low saturation orange. Try it and see

[Anonymous No.15706903]

>categorizing photons by your perception
Just don't.
I bet you believe time is real just because your biology can interpret it.

[Anonymous No.15707165]

>this thread
lmao

[Anonymous No.15707332]

People still think Pink is light Red when it's actually light Magenta
No matter how you think, what I said is true, you can test it yourself on your computer

[Anonymous No.15707343]

>>15707332
Blown the fuck out lmao

[colorblind No.15707434]

>>15701954
idk anon that just looks like a white background to me

[Anonymous No.15707453]

>>15707434
so much pink for a faggot turns into white. anon you ODed on pink

[Anonymous No.15707479]

>>15707453
>my mfw when I OD on BBC

[Anonymous No.15707488]

>>15701985
Labia. Skin. Blood. None of that has a wavelength.

[Anonymous No.15707494]

>>15707488
>pussyphotons
best photons to hit my retina

[Anonymous No.15707509]

>>15701954
literally just saturated pink

[Anonymous No.15707517]

>>15707509
Yall pink maganta fags annoying af

[Anonymous No.15707785]

>>15707343
That's peach, not pink.

[Anonymous No.15707797]

>>15707785
Bitch please. You wear that and you're wearing pink

[Anonymous No.15707802]

>>15707517
I see coral, salmon, fuschia, rose, but I don't see no fucking PINK
I WAS TOLD THERE WOULD BE PINK

[Anonymous No.15707805]

>>15707802
No fuschia there. All red white and pink with some coral and salmon in between.

[Anonymous No.15707813]

>>15704670
>>15706018
you two should just fuck over wavelengths over the the arm of a chair

[Anonymous No.15707816]

>>15707785
>>15707802
light magenta's lavender like your grandma's pussy hair. Pink is light red

[Anonymous No.15707828]

[Anonymous No.15707833]

>>15707828
Come on now. Really?

[Anonymous No.15707857]

>>15707833
it might be a sort of lavender pink. dunno, women are weird that way

[Anonymous No.15707859]

>>15707833
>>15707857
I mean that's not lemonade, but it might be some lemonade pink

[Anonymous No.15707868]

>>15707857
FFCCFF I'd call bluish Carnation pink.
FBAED2 I don't even know. Maybe orange peony nipple.

[Anonymous No.15707892]

>>15707828
Someone call that color CREAMY and the number "FF" "69" "B4"? Nigga y'all just fucking with me right now

[Anonymous No.15708153]

>>15707892
They have played us all for absolute fools.

[Anonymous No.15708227]

>>15707828
Those aren't wavelengths.

[Anonymous No.15708230]

>>15708227
Not a one.

[Anonymous No.15708280]

>>15707813
Holy autism

[Anonymous No.15708288]

>>15701954
Magenta HAS wavelength. Wavelength of both ends of the visible spectrum. It contains a huge amount of photons of around 400nm as well as a huge amount of photons of around 700nm.

Every color has. Even white. White is nothing but an overflow of photons. So much, our eyes or brain can't handle it. Increase the amount and you'll be blinded.

[Anonymous No.15708418]

>>15702008
>anon
That is not anon, that is some pseudoanonymous namefag, so you should be calling him pseud rather than anon.

[Anonymous No.15708456]

>>15708418
He said "elaborate anon", not "elaborate, Anon".

[Anonymous No.15708700]

/x/ here. Why would T-Mobile pick this colour? What does it mean?

[Anonymous No.15708743]

>>15708700
They didn't, their color isn't that crazy

[Anonymous No.15708936]

>>15708743
I was at the store and heard a worker correct a customer that is was magenta, not pink.

[Anonymous No.15708944]

>>15708936
I was also there and asked to speak with the manager and he said the worker was wrong to say that.

[Anonymous No.15708957]

>>15708743
Zooming in, the line and the T are not of the same color.

[Anonymous No.15709490]

>>15701985
Brown
It's just desaturated orange

[Anonymous No.15709510]

>>15709490

[Anonymous No.15709524]

>>15702051
there should be a second red bump in the short part of the graph

[Anonymous No.15709585]

>>15709510
Nta, but that looks very orange to me.

[Anonymous No.15710624]

>>15701954
Multiplexing is the ability to transmit more than one signal via the same channel

[Anonymous No.15710625]

Look up "impossible colours" you can really experience them, it's strange stuff

[Anonymous No.15710626]

>>15701954
Do you trust a map or the territory. A model tells you something isn't real, so you beliebe it despite what's in your face?

[Anonymous No.15710628]

>>15710626
The brainlet is actually just using the wrong map.

[Anonymous No.15711057]

>>15701954
There's something weird about that color. Always looks weird in GMod

[Anonymous No.15711070]

>>15708944
Highly unlikely.
>>15708957
Yeah, f that guy.