Mean colour of visible spectrum?

  • #1
1,007
76
How the Mean colour of visible spectrum is yellow?
Shouldn't
that be green according to acronym VIBGYOR?
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Quantum Defect
Homework Helper
Gold Member
495
116
How the Mean colour of visible spectrum is yellow?
Shouldn't
that be green according to acronym VIBGYOR?
This depends upon the light source, and how you calculate the "mean", I think.
 
  • #3
Drakkith
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
21,105
4,935
How the Mean colour of visible spectrum is yellow?
I've never heard this before. Can you post a reference? It may help to get some context.
 
  • #4
DaveC426913
Gold Member
19,200
2,692
The mean is going to be based on wavelength - which ranges between 350 and 800 nm.

It depends on what source you use for "visible light", as there seems to be a quite a range of opinions.
 
  • #6
DaveC426913
Gold Member
19,200
2,692
Above shows solar spectrum. Peak is in the green. It is asymmetric, higher at red end than at purple end.
Sure but
a] question was not about solar spectrum, just visible spectrum, and
b] question was not about average (i.e. weighted), it is about mean (i.e. highest minus lowest).

In this example, mean is 600nm
visible-spectrums.png
 
  • #7
1,007
76
I've never heard this before. Can you post a reference? It may help to get some context.
There was a question in my practical manual-
" In general for which colour we take the refractive index of a material in lens and glass slabs.""
The answer was given
Yellow colour. Since it is the mean colour of visible spectrum.

I had a doubt as green colour lies in between the visible spectrum. The mean wavelength and mean frequency of visible spectrum should be green?
 
  • #8
140
18
How the Mean colour of visible spectrum is yellow?
Shouldn't
that be green according to acronym VIBGYOR?
I've understood the acronym as ROY G BIV
 
  • #9
jbriggs444
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
9,612
4,260
Sure but
a] question was not about solar spectrum, just visible spectrum, and
b] question was not about average (i.e. weighted), it is about mean (i.e. highest minus lowest).
The statement was vague. The boundaries of the visible spectrum are not exact. The statement was not about mean wavelength or mean frequency but about mean "color". All averages are weighted. It's just that the weights are often assumed to be uniform. But uniform by what measure? A uniform weight by frequency will give a different mean than a uniform weight by wavelength.
 
  • #10
DaveC426913
Gold Member
19,200
2,692
I've understood the acronym as ROY G BIV
Either way it's a fabrication.

Newton saw 6 colours but he felt strongly that 7 was a divine number, so he added indigo.

I will see if I can find a reliable reference for this. There're plenty of not-so-reliable references to it.

"It has been suggested that, at the time, Newton was trying make some anology with the musical scale and the octave (with its seven intervals) and hence was keen to identify seven colours in the rainbow or visible spectrum. "
http://colourware.org/2009/07/20/indigo-a-colour-of-the-rainbow/

"Newton probably had other, very good reasons to define the Rainbow as a function of the favored magical number of seven,..."
http://naturalmagickshop.com/articles/The-Myth-Magic-and-Science-of-the-Rainbow.html

Here's one in the American Journal of Physics:

"The author hypothesizes that Newton saw seven reasonably distinct colors in the artist's paint mixture color circle (red, orange, yellow, green, blue, violet, and purple) and therefore assumed he could also see seven distinct colors in his crude spectral projections."
http://scitation.aip.org/content/aapt/journal/ajp/40/4/10.1119/1.1986607
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Drakkith
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
21,105
4,935
I had a doubt as green colour lies in between the visible spectrum. The mean wavelength and mean frequency of visible spectrum should be green?
Violet wavelength - about 400 nm
Red Wavelength - about 650 nm
Mean Wavelength - 525 nm

Light with a wavelength of 525 nm lies in the green area.

I would guess that the the standard for measuring the refractive index using yellow light is due to historical reasons, probably something to do with the sodium spectral line at 589 nm.
 
  • #12
1,007
76
Okay, got it . Thanks to all. Sorry for asking a last off topic question but isn't that avatar of you Drakkith is a Doom game hero? I really liked that game in my childhood
 
  • Like
Likes mp3car
  • #13
Drakkith
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
21,105
4,935
That it is!
 
  • Like
Likes mp3car
  • #14
sophiecentaur
Science Advisor
Gold Member
2020 Award
25,523
5,032
Why consider the mean wavelength when you could just as easily consider the mean frequency? Would you get the same answer? :) (Harmonic mean)
 
  • #15
1,007
76
Why consider the mean wavelength when you could just as easily consider the mean frequency? Would you get the same answer? :) (Harmonic mean)
I think we usually take arithmetic mean in these cases.
Then both have same mean wavelength and mean frequency.
 
  • #16
183
5
b] question was not about average (i.e. weighted), it is about mean (i.e. highest minus lowest).
Mean and [arithmetic] average are the same thing. Where are you getting "highest minus lowest" from? That's not any form of averaging as far as I know. If you take the average of 100 and 1 with that method, it comes out to 99, which doesn't make any sense.
 
  • #17
sophiecentaur
Science Advisor
Gold Member
2020 Award
25,523
5,032
I think we usually take arithmetic mean in these cases.
Then both have same mean wavelength and mean frequency.
Arithmetic mean of what? It is only arbitrary and historical that we measure the wavelength of light in preference to the frequency. In fact, the Chemistry of what goes on in our eye receptors will be frequency based and not wavelength based. (i.e. photon energies)
You should try with some different random values before you make a statement like that.
In general, the harmonic mean is not the same as the mean of a set of numbers.
(A +B)/2 is not the same as 1/((1/A + 1/B)/2), which is what you are claiming.
 
  • #18
sophiecentaur
Science Advisor
Gold Member
2020 Award
25,523
5,032
This thread is, as is very common, mixing up the notion of Colour with Wavelength. Our Eyes are not Spectrometers and they (plus brain) see colours, which are usually wavelength combinations. We use just three colour sensors which have very broad overlapping responses. The 'colour' we perceive has nothing necessarily directly to do with the mean or peak of the spectrum of the light. The tristimulus system does work on a mean or centre of gravity of colours on the CIE chart but that is a two dimensional display and not a one dimensional spectrum.
We do not 'see green' when there is a peak in the spectrum in the region of 'spectral green' because we are not designed to. That's all there is to say about it, unless you want to dig much deeper into the whole business of colour perception. It is just not that simple.
 
  • #19
1,007
76
Arithmetic mean of what? It is only arbitrary and historical that we measure the wavelength of light in preference to the frequency. In fact, the Chemistry of what goes on in our eye receptors will be frequency based and not wavelength based. (i.e. photon energies)
You should try with some different random values before you make a statement like that.
In general, the harmonic mean is not the same as the mean of a set of numbers.
(A +B)/2 is not the same as 1/((1/A + 1/B)/2), which is what you are claiming.
I know arithmetic mean is different from harmonic mean.
I am not claiming that both are equal.
I was kind of asking that why we have to take harmonic mean instead of arithmetic mean when we have to find mean frequency of visible spectrum?
I thought till Drakkith's reply I was understanding most of the things.
He gave also the reason that yellow might be the mean colour considered because of sodium history.
So if all in reality is frequency based according to your quote
Then why harmonic mean?
Isn't when we talk about means we usually refer arithmetic mean the most common?
 
Last edited:
  • #20
sophiecentaur
Science Advisor
Gold Member
2020 Award
25,523
5,032
I know arithmetic mean is different from harmonic mean.
I am not claiming that both are equal.
I was kind of asking that why we have to take harmonic mean instead of arithmetic mean when we have to find mean frequency of visible spectrum?
I thought till Drakkith's reply I was understanding most of the things.
He gave also the reason that yellow might be the mean colour considered because of sodium history.
So if all in reality is frequency based according to your quote
Then why harmonic mean?
The frequency is inversely proportional to the wavelength so, if you want the same answer for both, you need to take the harmonic mean for one and the arithmetic mean for the other. I was originally making the point that using a mean wavelength is an arbitrary choice.
Also, there really is no such thing as a Mean Colour (a very fuzzy quantity, at best). There is no future in a conversation that tries to relate what we perceive to the spectrum of incident light unless you are prepared to include how the three sensors will respond, separately, to the black body spectrum and then plot the resultant (processed) signal values onto a CIE chart. But you don't need to do that sum, to know the answer and that is - You Won't See Green. Every day you do that experiment when you look at sunlight reflected on white surfaces.
 
  • #21
1,007
76
The frequency is inversely proportional to the wavelength so, if you want the same answer for both, you need to take the harmonic mean for one and the arithmetic mean for the other. I was originally making the point that using a mean wavelength is an arbitrary choice.
Also, there really is no such thing as a Mean Colour (a very fuzzy quantity, at best). There is no future in a conversation that tries to relate what we perceive to the spectrum of incident light unless you are prepared to include how the three sensors will respond, separately, to the black body spectrum and then plot the resultant (processed) signal values onto a CIE chart. But you don't need to do that sum, to know the answer and that is - You Won't See Green. Every day you do that experiment when you look at sunlight reflected on white surfaces.
Okay, now I am getting to understand you.
I did some maths
Sorry for using the calculator.:D (as it is a fast way, only for mean freq.)
I took the numbers from Drakkith post 11.
Violet wavelength as 400nm and red wavelength as 650 nm.
When we use arithmetic mean here we get 525 nm as A.M wavelength which is of green.

Now taking the same numbers, calculated the H.M
Got it as 495.238 nm
I guess that taking these numbers are wrong, as the units are coming in nanometers. It should be hertz.
Should I calculate H.M frequency by taking the upper and lower range of visible region frequency?
What is your opinion?
 
  • #22
jbriggs444
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
9,612
4,260
What frequency corresponds to a wavelength of 495.238 nm?

How does this frequency compare to the arithmetic mean of the upper and lower frequencies of the visible range?
 
  • #23
1,007
76
What frequency corresponds to a wavelength of 495.238 nm?

How does this frequency compare to the arithmetic mean of the upper and lower frequencies of the visible range?
Indigo corresponds to that. According to this
https://www.google.co.in/#q=frequency+of+visible+light&imgrc=YP-FAEbAa3zJQM%3A;undefined;http%3A%2F%2Fwww.relativitycalculator.com%2Fimages%2FAlbert_Michelson_Part_I%2Fcolor_wavelength_frequency.png;http%3A%2F%2Fwww.relativitycalculator.com%2FAlbert_Michelson_Part_I.shtml;451;162

And blue corresponds by taking into account your 2 para in quote and this link.
Different colours and not green coming, how?
When calculating A.M for frequency
Lowest freq. was 400 Thz
And highest was 790 Thz.
A.M came 595 Thz
 
  • #24
sophiecentaur
Science Advisor
Gold Member
2020 Award
25,523
5,032
You are missing my point here. It was that the concept of a mean wavelength / colour / frequency is not relevant in any way, other than for an exercise in numerology. That is why I pointed out the difference between mean frequency and mean wavelength. You can chose any set of numbers and show that the results of calculations of the means are usually different. Starting with seven letters and choosing the middle one is just an exercise on a Scrabble tray. The questioner asked (implicitly) why we don't see Green Stars. It's a phychovisual thing and nothing to do with means or peaks in the spectrum.
 
  • #25
jbriggs444
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
9,612
4,260
Indigo corresponds to that.
What I and others were fishing for was to get you thinking about the relationship between arithmetic mean, harmonic mean, weavelength and frequency.

Violet wavelength as 400nm and red wavelength as 650 nm.
When we use arithmetic mean here we get 525 nm as A.M wavelength which is of green.
Now taking the same numbers, calculated the H.M
Got it as 495.238 nm
What is the frequency corresponding to 400 nm? Divide the speed of light by 400 nm and you get around 750 terahertz.
What is the frequency corresponding to 650 nm? Divide the speed of light by 650 nm and you get around 461 terahertz.

What is the arithmetic mean of those two frequencies? Add and divide by two and you get around 605.5 terahertz.

What wavelength does that frequency correspond to? Divide the speed of light by 605.5 terahertz and you get around 495 nm.

By no coincidence, 495 nm is the harmonic mean of 400 nm and 650 nm.
 

Related Threads on Mean colour of visible spectrum?

  • Last Post
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
18K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
13K
Replies
28
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
630
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
1K
Top