48 replies to this topic

[mobster281]

I thing this was brought up on another forum a long time ago and it did get me thinking. It is very possible that it could be true

[Sweeney]

This is something i thought about on a car journey once.

Take this colour for example. What colour is it? It's red.
But why do you call it red? It's because since you were born, you've been taught that whenever you see that colour, you call it red. But who's to say you're seeing the same colour as me?

This colour is blue. Like before, you've been taught to call this blue.
But who's to say we don't see the colours the other way round? We wouldn't know, as we'd name them exactly the same because that's what we learnt since we were young.

That could be one of the reasons why people have different favourite colours...right? One man's favourite colour might be red, and someone else's might be blue. But for all we know, they could infact like the exact same colour.
I have to admit, i did a few weeks later come up with something that would deem this theory invalid, but i'll leave that for you to think about

This, I think, is a perfect example of scientific belief.
This cannot be proven, nor can it be disproven, but I do choose to believe that it exists.
I think this is why we have different preferences in colour, just as SidaZoid says.

And Sonic, this is related to the perception of the colour, not its physical properties.

[Waser Lave]

If everyone saw colours differently then surely we'd have heard about it by now, say if you said to your friend "look at that red bus", and he replied, "that bus is blue", to which you follow, "WTF! are you colour blind or something?".

Edited by Laser Wave, 15 August 2006 - 12:21 PM.

[Tim]

If everyone saw colours differently then surely we'd have heard about it by now, say if you said to your friend "look at that red bus", and he replied, "that bus is blue", to which you follow, "WTF! are you colour blind or something?".

He means to say that some peoples' versions of "red" could be different from others.

Edited by Tim, 15 August 2006 - 12:28 PM.

[Shin]

If everyone saw colours differently then surely we'd have heard about it by now, say if you said to your friend "look at that red bus", and he replied, "that bus is blue", to which you follow, "WTF! are you colour blind or something?".

But what if this happens? To you:

BUS

To your friend:

BUS

It's the same bus, but both of you see it differently. You have been taught to interpret this color as blue, and your friend has been taught to interpret this color as blue. So both of you will mutually consent that the bus is blue.

[Darkness24]

EVERYONE sees the same damn colors. -.- I look at a blue cup, i ask my friend what color that is, he'll say blue. NOW if you want to talk about why we called it blue in the first place, there you would make a point. Red is red, no matter what, it will always be that color, but why did we call it red, why didnt we call red blue? BUT even if we were to call it blue, it would be the same color, changing the name of something does not make it what it is. you can take a piece of paper, and call it bologna but it is still not eatable, does not taste like a meat product, and does not remotely look like it. END OF CASE

[Lange]

Although it sounds like an interesting theory. I dont agree with it.
Just as sonic mentionned, it has to do with the reflexion of the light so every one sees the same colors. If someone had a brain problem or something that would somehow change the color in the process then it could be true.

But anyway just ask yourself why nobody likes brown(exept caillou)

Of course everyone cant agree on wich color is the prettiest but what about yourself? Could you really explain why you like a color better than another?

[Crayon]

Wouldn't we know by now?

[pyke]

Wouldn't we know by now?

There wouldn't be any method to detect it

[Alex]

Even if such a thing was in existence, it would have been known by now
So its not possible lol.

[Sweeney]

I think the majority of the posters in this thread fail totally to understand the concept.

Let me try to explain it again, though in my opinion, SidaZoid did a perfectly good job in the first place.

Modern science can explain light, and with it, the physical property of colour.
Colour depends on the wavelength, and purity, of the light.
At least, it could be defined that way.
In reality, there is no property of colour (in reference to light), there is only the property of wavelength.
Colour is a perception, how the brain interprets the action potentials propagating along the optic nerves.
Nobody knows how we see. That is a fact.
Yes, we know the mechanism by which the patterns of light are interpreted into electrical impulses, and how these impulses are relayed to the brain, but the conundrum of sight does not end there.
I defy anyone to explain exactly what the image is that allows me to know where the keys are on my keyboard.
What is that image? Where is that image? How does it relate to my conscious self?
It is in this stage, in the interpretation by the brain to form this bodiless image, that the question of colour comes into play.
Ok, the red bus will stimulate the same nervous reaction in two different people (ignoring biological defects and illnesses), but you cannot possibly know, though you may assume, that the brains of these two people will represent the impulses in the same way.

[Lange]

can you see a graduation with the colors?

if red looked like blue and vice-versa, you would see a problem with the graduation.

[Shin]

can you see a graduation with the colors?

if red looked like blue and vice-versa, you would see a problem with the graduation.

I don't know if this is what the original topic meant, but what if someone saw every color as its opposite? Then there would still be a smooth graduation in that picture, but all the colors would be "messed up."

[Sweeney]

can you see a graduation with the colors?

if red looked like blue and vice-versa, you would see a problem with the graduation.

That's absurd.
Any colour can be faded into any other colour.
You just see that as the logical progression because it is something you learn.

[sonic]

That's absurd.
Any colour can be faded into any other colour.
You just see that as the logical progression because it is something you learn.

There is so much clarity to this subject to someone who understands the propertys of light, and their perception....

Motion= relative
(ex: If a person was on a train and a person was on the ground, both people would be able to make a legitiment claim that they are stationary and the other is moving. This is proved my newtonian laws, and general thoery of relativity.)

Size= relative
(ex: If everything in the universe got 1000000000000000x bigger than it is now, then there would not be a SINGLE test that could discover it. Infact, there would be no point in even saying it happend because NOTHING would change.)

Time = relative
(ex: Someone on top of a water tower ages more faster than someone on the ground because the higher you are, the less force gravity has one you. And gravity slows things down. Just like if you were to go the speed of light. Your mass would be so hugly great that time would go by VERY slowly for you. This is proved by the special theory of relativity.)

Color = NOT relative
(ex: an object obsorbing or deflecting certain wavlengths of light emit the same physical attributes to every person in the same general distance from the object. Now as redshift shows, the farther away a certain color of light is, the more different it is.)

[Lange]

I'm just not strong enough in physic to explain that kinda thing so I took the rainbow thing to support my argument but anyway..

I'm sure any good physic teacher could tell you why everyone sees the same color.

In seems pretty simple in my head so I dont get you

[Sweeney]

Ugh, why do I have to say this again.

Colour is not a physical property of light.

Colour is a -perception-, and you cannot possibly say that everyone percieves them in the same way.

[sonic]

Ugh, why do I have to say this again.

Colour is not a physical property of light.

Colour is a -perception-, and you cannot possibly say that everyone percieves them in the same way.

Actually it is.... color is THERE.
Its not relative

[Ives]

True Color isn't relative. What the actual cerebrum sees depends on its functioning level with light and colors. Varying in a way, but true color stays the same.

[Raui]

this could happen if you were bought up on a island and your parents said that the color blue ir red and the color red is blue.

[Ives]

That follows the language theory though. For example, in english, snow is just snow, but in an Eskimo dialect, there are 40+ types of snow. But Quantum theory doesn't interest me too much.

[nox]

This is something i thought about on a car journey once.

Take this colour for example. What colour is it? It's red.
But why do you call it red? It's because since you were born, you've been taught that whenever you see that colour, you call it red. But who's to say you're seeing the same colour as me?

And the funny thing is, it's nearly impossible to describe that color except with something broad like "bright". Or with another color.

[Sweeney]

Ali is speshul

Um, you're not understanding me, you lot up there.
Objects have a colour, yes.

LIGHT DOES NOT. IN TERMS OF LIGHT, THERE IS NO SUCH PROPERTY.
Mk?

And Bruce, you have absolutely know way of knowing how the brain interprets the impulses it recieves from the eyes...

['B']

Color is our perception of a feature of light: frequency.
Since frequency can be changed through the doppler effect so can color.
Undeniable fact.


Disregarding the doppler effect: the only way I think we could ever prove that everyone sees the same colors would be to set up a machine that could read the brain waves fired when a person perceives light and recreate the image. If that person perceived blue light as red, then it would show up as red on the machine screen instead of blue.

Edited by CodeDreamer, 27 August 2006 - 12:48 PM.