Why there is no frequency for the color brown?

[John Green]

A fair amount of research since the 1960s suggests that language affects how we perceive colors. For example some languages do not have different words for blue and green and native speakers of those languages do not make much distinction between them and seem to perceive as much more similar than say English speakers.

 

[sophiecentaur]

Brown does in fact have a central wavelength. It is a dark, desaturated shade of orange, around 620 nm.

That is true for some browns but pretty much all real colors are desaturated and many are low luminance. I still think it's unwise to connect wavelength with colour. It's comparing a one dimensional quantity with a (at least) three dimensional quantity.

 

[Drakkith]

You can in fact render violet, but not at 100% saturation.

I assume you mean that the blue pixels on a display have a wide enough spectrum that it includes some amount of violet?

A fair amount of research since the 1960s suggests that language affects how we perceive colors. For example some languages do not have different words for blue and green and native speakers of those languages do not make much distinction between them and seem to perceive as much more similar than say English speakers.

Do you have a good reference or two? This is difficult to believe and I'd like to read more about it.

 

[John Green]

I have not read any Primary sources but here is kind of an overview that does list some sources.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue–green_distinction_in_language
Note that this theory is not without it's detractors.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity_and_the_color_naming_debate

Some popular references.
http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb05/hues.aspx


I am not sure of the veracity of any of this. Just something I ran across while taking a short linguistics class back in the 70s,

 

[Graeme M]

Drakkith, this is what I referred to in my other post. The reference I read claimed that people cannot "see" colors for which they have no words. I assume that means that mechanically their eyes detect these colors and pass them on to the processing of color, but that actual conscious perception (which I think really means discrimination) depends on having a word (or perhaps concept is a better term) for that color. So while mechanically the colors must be available to them, they do not necessarily discriminate in everyday conscious perception. The Berinmo tribe in Papua New Guinea are apparently an example of the blue/green discrimination mentioned above. I suppose this is no different to learning to discriminate between the various flavours in wines - all wine tastes much the same to me because I don't care for it, but connoisseurs can detect far more flavours than I can. Their conscious experience must differ even though mechanically the same processes occur at the level of detection.

 

[sophiecentaur]

The reference I read claimed that people cannot "see" colors for which they have no words.

I really doubt that people would not find two different metemeric matches when presented with a sample image and being told to adjust the RGB controls on a TV display (no mention of naming the colours). I am very suspicious of psychological tests that are aimed at 'proving' a theory for such a complex process. Sounds very much like the way politicians behave.

 

[Graeme M]

sophiecentaur I wondered at this too. I think it very likely that they can discriminate when the question is posed in a mechanical manner, but not so much when posed as a psychological matter. Perhaps in such cases, people simply don't bother to discriminate even though capable of it. Nonetheless, it seems a well studied subject.

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1069397104267890

And this research may be especially relevant:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982207014819

 

[John Green]

Sounds very much like the way politicians behave.
Can't say I disagree with that.

 

[sophiecentaur]

There is parallel here with Music vs Sound. Recognising musical chord progressions is something that needs to be learned (except if you're a musical genius). You hear a song and you perhaps recognise that a melody is involved but someone who 'knows' about music will know how the song works. The proverbial 'tone deaf' listener can still be aware that changes are happening to the sound but cannot analyse it.

 

[DaTario]

I would like to kindly ask someone in this debate to clearify the following concepts, which seem to be associated to this discussion:
1) saturation
2) metemeric
3) hue

Best wishes,

 

[sophiecentaur]

Have you searched those terms? What have you found out for yourself?

 

[DaTario]

Have you searched those terms? What have you found out for yourself?

The first two have been used in this thread. The last one is a word that a friend of mine frequently uses in discussions about the physics of light.

 

[SlowThinker]

(about green-blue indifference)

Do you have a good reference or two? This is difficult to believe and I'd like to read more about it.

Some time ago I experienced something similar. I had to remember a color, then walk for a few seconds, and compare that old color to another one. I realized that I can't really remember a color, only its name, and if I didn't have a good name for it, I had to return several times for the comparison and still wasn't sure.
This might be only limited to simple colors though.
Using sound as an analogy, I can't tell 1kHz sine wave from 1.1kHz but I can easily tell when I hear a remake of a song I heard 20 years ago.
Going back to colors, perhaps I could tell one light-green from another if there was a patch of yellow lying around.

 

[sophiecentaur]

What have you found out for yourself?

The first two have been used in this thread.

And what have you found out for yourself? PF is not just a lazy man's source of the meanings of words. It's for discussing topics, based on some input from the participants.

 

[DaTario]

Sophiecentaur, I respectfully believe PF is a source of the meaning of words and concepts. Those who know their meaning try to help the ones who don´t know, but want to know. If you are calling me lazy I suppose you have some evidence to support this inference. Nowadays, it is becoming difficult to ask a friend what is the name of the band who played with Sting in Bring on the Night, because it seems you are lazy for not having asked Google first. I confess I prefer to ask you than google. If you don´t want to answer, it is up to you. I respect. But you should not generalize, thinking everyone here doesn´t want to get involved in a talk with some other person who hasn´t asked "google". It seems to me that some good conversations sometimes begins with lazy talks (but at the same time interested talks). I love physics and I get worried seeing people like you using hard words with others as if it was a symbol of your knowledge, seriousness or intelectual content. I hope you find your own happy place in this forum.

Answering your question, I have not looked up in the internet what hue is, but once, discussing with a colleague physiscts, I heard him saying that it is a useful and preferable concept in dealing with contexts where color plays a significant role. I can´t remember exactly what the subject of our discussion was. But let me emphasize that my ignorance doesn´t make me fragile in front of your intention to appear a serious scientist. Finally I would dare to place here a piece of advice: if you don´t want to answer a question here, a sound option is to remain silent. Let those who want to collaborate do it.

I really don´t know how much power is given to the author of the OP, but anyway I would like to formally ask this thread to be closed due to the occurrence of personal ofence.

 

[DaTario]

Sorry. It would be contradictory for me to assume LAZY is an ofence. I don´t think so. If you have called me lazy, I think I must not feel ofended. Sorry, Sophiecentaur.

 

[Drakkith]

Answering your question, I have not looked up in the internet what hue is, but once, discussing with a colleague physiscts, I heard him saying that it is a useful and preferable concept in dealing with contexts where color plays a significant role. I can´t remember exactly what the subject of our discussion was. But let me emphasize that my ignorance doesn´t make me fragile in front of your intention to appear a serious scientist. Finally I would dare to place here a piece of advice: if you don´t want to answer a question here, a sound option is to remain silent. Let those who want to collaborate do it.

The problem is that finding the basic definition or use of most words and concepts is trivially easy and you can usually find a wealth of information with perhaps only slightly more effort, if any at all. These sources are often far better equipped to give you the basic information on a topic than anyone here at PF is and you're essentially offloading the small amount of effort it takes to look up these words on to someone else. It's like having a book in front of you and asking someone else to open the book to the page you want. It's trivial, but generally annoying to those being asked and is usually taken to mean that the person just doesn't care that much.

 

[DaTario]

Ok, Drakkith, but don´t you agree that there are several questions of this kind (in this forum) in which some patient person, instead of complaining, takes the task to inform what was asked (it may be something that could be obtained basically in the internet) and that interaction simply flows naturally?

My point is that sometimes a trivial question may serve as a start to a discussion, and it can also start a relationship between two persons.
By adopting the rule in which if I don´t think this question deserves an answer, I simply don´t give an answer to it, one gives chance to the appearance of good interactions. The use of hard words seems to be far from necessary in cases like this.

 

[DaTario]

Despite the seismic event, I would like to express deep gratitude to all that have contributed to this thread, including, of course Sophiecentaur, who gave perhaps one of the most significant ones.

 

[Drakkith]

Ok, Drakkith, but don´t you agree that there are several questions of this kind (in this forum) in which some patient person, instead of complaining, takes the task to inform what was asked (it may be something that could be obtained basically in the internet) and that interaction simply flows naturally?

My point is that sometimes a trivial question may serve as a start to a discussion, and it can also start a relationship between two persons.

Of course. But I'd be willing to bet that there are far more instances of such relationships developing when the person asking the question has done some basic legwork first.

By adopting the rule in which if I don´t think this question deserves an answer, I simply don´t give an answer to it, one gives chance to the appearance of good interactions. The use of hard words seems to be far from necessary in cases like this.

If you don't think someone's question deserves an answer, and you don't tell them, how will they learn to write better questions?

 

[DaTario]

If you don't think someone's question deserves an answer, and you don't tell them, how will they learn to write better questions?

I guess you have a good point. But in order to be productive instead of distructive the "teacher" must know how to tell. Otherwise the message and the thing that was learned may conflict.

obs: the scientific way of interchanging experiences is a good subject. Much is to be bettered. But I think we are messing up with the OP. Thank you for your words. I guess I have learned something with you both.

 

[sophiecentaur]

@DaTario
It's a shame that you took such offense at my use of the word "lazy". You seem to be assuming things about the role of PF. It actually exists for the pleasure and interest of the contributors. There is really not much pleasure or interest in dishing out basic information that's readily available elsewhere on line. There is effort involved in producing as a good a definition as you can find in Wiki and where is the interest or reward, it PF is just 'dial an answer'?
A question that starts off for instance: "I have read that X is defined this way - how does that fit in with what I have observed about X?" will always get an interested response. That question would show a sign of effort.
You can test my claim in your next contribution to PF. Do a bit of homework first and your effort will be rewarded.

 

[DaTario]

Sophiecentaur, I don´t expect you to feel bad for speaking like you did. I have read all the contributions to my question. Some words went in and their meaning were unknown to me, so I asked. I refuse to accept your claim that my contact with the words metemeric, hue and saturation are effort free. I wasn´t lingering at my bed when these words simply appeared. I believe some PF contributors sometimes feel the pressure of having to contribute and your response to my question seems to reveals a bit about how you are dealing with this environment which is ultimately vonluntary. If you got paid to attend me, I would be worried to define seriously the concept of homework in order to ask you only after having done it. I am always doing homeworks. I have now here dozens of sheets of papers around me, each one with a different conchoid printed on it, and I may call my task cumbersome (albeit pleasant). Your use of the word lazy was not gentle at all.

 

[Drakkith]

I'm going to go ahead and close the thread since it appears the original discussion is done and the thread has veered sharply off topic. Thank you to everyone who contributed.

Thread locked.