B What Makes the Six Colors in Newton's Experiment Special?

[DaveC426913]

That gives six possible combinations that our visual cortex can process, rg, rb, gr, gb, bg, br, to associate a colour to an object.

I don't get this. The brain doesn't process in pairs like this.

It processes the relative values of all three types - simply: rgb.

 

[Electron Spin]

In my current reality there are 3 primary colours..

But... That's just mine...

Hello Dave!

 

[sophiecentaur]

I don't get this. The brain doesn't process in pairs like this.

It processes the relative values of all three types - simply: rgb.

I couldn't find that post from routone, for a suitable riposte and I have already suggested that he / everyone should do some reading about the pretty well established tristimulus theory of colour vision. This thread is not going anywhere whilst people are still posting with Primary School ideas, based on mixing paints and crayons. Personal theories, based on no evidence are discouraged on PF, surely.
Edit: I wondered whether this response is too grumpy but I have reconsidered it to be appropriate.

 

[rootone]

I'm not proposing a personal theory,and I will look into the established theory you mentioned.
My earlier post was really just a stab at a guess as for why traditionally artists, (of greater talent than schoolkids) thought in terms of 3 primary colours.
3 primary colours and their possible simple combinations gives a total of six easily identifiable colours.
That idea does correspond to what is now known to be the physical nature of light receptor neurons (rod cells) in human eyes.
I do know of course that visible light is not intrinsically in 3 bands,and what we are talking of here is human perception, not the nature of light as such,

 

[sophiecentaur]

My earlier post was really just a stab at a guess as for why traditionally artists, (of greater talent than schoolkids) thought in terms of 3 primary colours.

The 'Primaries' used by artists are not the RGB primaries, used in additive colour mixing. The whole system is different for producing the required range of colours because using pigments / paints / inks is subtractive. Very few artists try to paint with just three primaries (Cyan, Yellow and Magenta) because you can only produce saturated results (strong colours) by reducing the available luminance. One primary masks the other, reducing the total light available. If an artist (or printer* designer) wants to produce high fidelity and bright colours, it is necessary for them to use extra colours ('spot colours' are used for well known colours - such as the Coca-cola Red).
I can't understand why you insist on limiting your colorimetric rules to just six colours. The last time I experienced this limitation was in programming the BBC Microcomputer which had only binary values for its RGB video signals. People with normal colour vision can recognise and remember many more than your six colours and many colours are not part of the spectral set (Newton's six or seven). Why are you still defending this inadequate colour system? We normally try to work with appropriate accuracy in any other fields of Science and Engineering.
PS, it's the Cone receptors that are responsible for colour perception.
*Dot matrix printers tend to use interleaved coloured dots where possible so they can achieve high saturation without compromising too much on luminance.

 

[DarkBabylon]

Your monitor is able to make 16 million colors. Of course this is using 3 colors varying in intensity (256 for each). In the human visible spectrum alone you can have virtually infinite. Now take into account you can mix colors together. But wait there's more: X-rays, Ultra violets, Gamma rays, Radio, Microwave, infra-red...
The problem is, our eyes have a limited range that they can distinguish, rendering many of the wavelengths redundant.

 

[sophiecentaur]

rendering many of the wavelengths redundant.

No so much "redundant" as indistinguishable from their neighbours. All wavelengths contribute energy to what the colour sensors 'see'. The point has already been made that the ability to distinguish between adjacent colours will depend on the actual light level. It's the same old problem of Signal to Noise Ratio you need enough energy arriving on the three sensor to be able to assign a 'value' to their response so that your brain can do the sums and come up with a definite colour.
The Cones need much higher incident light levels in order to do this than the much more sensitive Rods. We always take clothes into a bright area to assess whether or not we have a good enough match. Daylight is best because the illuminant will affect the actual colour we decide we're seeing. CFL bulbs and old Fluo tubes are really bad for colour appreciation.

 

[DrClaude]

The OP has long been answered. Time to close.