Brain Hurts... But Magenta Doesn't Exist

[Arius]

http://www.null-hypothesis.co.uk/science/strange-but-true/profs-probings/colour_spectrum_magenta_complimentary_bizarre

So what does the brain do when our eyes detect wavelengths from both ends of the light spectrum at once (i.e. red and violet light)? Generally speaking, it has two options for interpreting the input data:

a) Sum the input responses to produce a colour halfway between red and violet in the spectrum (which would in this case produce green – not a very representative colour of a red and violet mix)
b) Invent a new colour halfway between red and violet

Magenta is the evidence that the brain takes option b – it has apparently constructed a colour to bridge the gap between red and violet, because such a colour does not exist in the light spectrum. Magenta has no wavelength attributed to it, unlike all the other spectrum colours.

tl;dr

The brain interprets colour mixes by their wavelength. Magenta (pink) doesn't exist in the visible light spectrum. The brain invents it to stand in for a red-violet mix.

still tl;dr
Pink doesn't exist.

[the amativeness]

Pink doesn't exist.

Tell that to Kate. And Evil Jim.

[Evil Jim]

still tl;dr
Pink doesn't exist.

Somthin' wrong wit' yo eyes, brotha.

[Arius]

still tl;dr
Pink doesn't exist.

Somthin' wrong wit' yo eyes, brotha.

[Gordon Fearman]

Man, you were just lazy.

[Elomin Sha]

still tl;dr
Pink doesn't exist.

Somthin' wrong wit' yo eyes, brotha.

Yahtzee on an acid trip?

[Arius]

Man, you were just lazy.

It's 4 am, what do you want from me?

[epocalypse]

The brain interprets colour mixes by their wavelength. Magenta (pink) doesn't exist in the visible light spectrum. The brain invents it to stand in for a red-violet mix.

still tl;dr
Pink doesn't exist.

Okay... this here, is stupid. Magenta (which is NOT pink) is an additive secondary color (subtractive primary). It is a mix of Blue and Red, just like Yellow (yes, Yellow) is a mix of Green and Red, and Cyan is a mix of Green and Blue. The only "actual colors" of light are Red, Green, and Blue (RGB Anyone?) The mixing of which can create all other color variants that are humanly visible. The others simple appear on a regular light spectrum because their Primaries appear to mix to the human eye. Interestingly, the Subtractive Primaries (CMY, and guess what they stand for) Can be mixed to create every visible color as well, which is why kids today longer get taught the atrocity of red, blue and yellow being primary colors. This is just a gross misinterpretation of color science. It's like people who don't realize that Black, Gray and White aren't not colors because they don't exist, but because their Gradations of Brightness.

Now, if you want a real mindfutzing, how about the point that there may not be fundamental colors at all.

Pink, however, a series of bright gradations of red and magenta that are easily confused, does not exist. It is the equivalent of an irrational number, and it's inability to be clearly expressed as a fraction is proof of this. I mean, duh people.

[Arius]

The brain interprets colour mixes by their wavelength. Magenta (pink) doesn't exist in the visible light spectrum. The brain invents it to stand in for a red-violet mix.

still tl;dr
Pink doesn't exist.

Okay... this here, is stupid. Magenta (which is NOT pink)

Magenta is the official name for pink.

---

And as for the rest of it, the way they measure it is the wavelength. Magenta is the only colour in the visible spectrum without any wavelength whatsoever.

[epocalypse]

then why do they have... SEPARATE WIKIPEDIA PAGES!?!?!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magenta

Your move, Arius! Choose Wisely.

[Arius]

Iron Man and Robert Downey Jr. have separate Wikipedia pages.

And I dare you to prove that he's not really Iron Man. I mean come on, substance abuse, loose women, hyper advanced exo-suits. They share all the same things.

[epocalypse]

Iron Man and Robert Downey Jr. have separate Wikipedia pages.

And I dare you to prove that he's not really Iron Man. I mean come on, substance abuse, loose women, hyper advanced exo-suits. They share all the same things.

Uh, Arius, actors are not actually the characters they portray in films (except for Sir Sean Connery, of course). I know, I was shocked too.

I like this discussion, it's silly.

[Arius]

Robert Downey Jr isn't an actor.

Now, Johnny Depp, that's an actor.

[manika]

somehow I expected to get to the wikipedia page about Pink, not about some diferent shades of magenta, rose, light red, or whatever it want's to be called (i know, cheap joke, but I couldn't resist)

Okay... this here, is stupid. Magenta (which is NOT pink)

Magenta is not what is called Magenta using wikipedia's hex triplets though.

anyways: about that hurting brain, I know some people and all they wanna do is eat.. ok, i'll stop now and won't post anymore until I got some sleep.

[AlexanderDitto]

The only "actual colors" of light are Red, Green, and Blue (RGB Anyone?) The mixing of which can create all other color variants that are humanly visible. The others simple appear on a regular light spectrum because their Primaries appear to mix to the human eye.

Uh, no. You're confusing human perception of light color with the physical characteristic of light that gives it its color. Red, Green, and Blue are the only vectors along which the cones in our eyes can measure light. That doesn't mean yellow light is doesn't exist: yellow light has a specific wavelength: 570–580 nm. It's just our eyes are able to interpret it because it activates the Long and Medium length cones (red and green respectively) about equally, which "mixes" to yellow.

When light mixes, its wavelength doesn't change. It's just... you have waves of two different wavelengths. Unless you have interference, but that's a whole 'nother discussion.

Pink, however, a series of bright gradations of red and magenta that are easily confused, does not exist. It is the equivalent of an irrational number, and it's inability to be clearly expressed as a fraction is proof of this. I mean, duh people.

Uh, what? The comparison to irrational numbers is, I think, not really apt. I think the point is that magenta is "extra-spectral;" that is, it's can't be produced with a single wavelength of light, like colors in the spectrum can (rainbow colors). Pink AND various shades of purple (including magenta) share this property. The brain can interpret them because it has the ability to interpret a mixture of different wavelengths (long and short, as the article points out) as not simply the average of the wavelengths but as a new color entirely.

[masamune]

this thread is great.

[Kaemon]

This is... interesting, and the discussion is a well.

But just the idea of it is amazing... I still wouldn't say it doesn't exist, but its definitely not normal.

[Lord Chrusher]

White, gray, black, and brown are not single wavelengths either.

[Machalllewis]

I think we can safely file this one under the same heading as how one does not equal one.

[tak197]

Are we arguing over color swatches? SERIOUSLY??

[Arius]

White, gray, black, and brown are not single wavelengths either.

The thing is, when you mix red and violet wavelengths, you should get green based on the wavelengths. When you have all the wavelengths, you get white. When you have green and red wavelengths mixed, you get yellow. When you have no wavelengths, you get black. Brown is from multiple wavelengths.

Magenta is from red and violet and as far as the visible spectrum is concerned, it's green. However, the brain processes it as magenta because as far as it's concerned, green doesn't fit.

[Mad Madam Mimm]

Are we arguing over color swatches? SERIOUSLY??

Yes.
Because this is an important decision and if you can't even commit to this... you know what, we're not having this argument in Homebase. God.

[manika]

still
Pink doesn't exist.

I think, green fits as well. Damn you eyes !

[epocalypse]

The only "actual colors" of light are Red, Green, and Blue (RGB Anyone?) The mixing of which can create all other color variants that are humanly visible. The others simple appear on a regular light spectrum because their Primaries appear to mix to the human eye.

Uh, no. You're confusing human perception of light color with the physical characteristic of light that gives it its color. Red, Green, and Blue are the only vectors along which the cones in our eyes can measure light. That doesn't mean yellow light is doesn't exist: yellow light has a specific wavelength: 570–580 nm. It's just our eyes are able to interpret it because it activates the Long and Medium length cones (red and green respectively) about equally, which "mixes" to yellow.

When light mixes, its wavelength doesn't change. It's just... you have waves of two different wavelengths. Unless you have interference, but that's a whole 'nother discussion.

Pink, however, a series of bright gradations of red and magenta that are easily confused, does not exist. It is the equivalent of an irrational number, and it's inability to be clearly expressed as a fraction is proof of this. I mean, duh people.

Uh, what? The comparison to irrational numbers is, I think, not really apt. I think the point is that magenta is "extra-spectral;" that is, it's can't be produced with a single wavelength of light, like colors in the spectrum can (rainbow colors). Pink AND various shades of purple (including magenta) share this property. The brain can interpret them because it has the ability to interpret a mixture of different wavelengths (long and short, as the article points out) as not simply the average of the wavelengths but as a new color entirely.

let me put it this way, though I subscribe to the color theory that colors are the perceptual correlates of light and not the wave, I did phrase it in a way where I admit, I was wrong. You got me. However, on the second half, I got you.

[Elomin Sha]

somehow I expected to get to the wikipedia page about Pink, not about some diferent shades of magenta, rose, light red, or whatever it want's to be called (i know, cheap joke, but I couldn't resist)

Okay... this here, is stupid. Magenta (which is NOT pink)

Magenta is not what is called Magenta using wikipedia's hex triplets though.

anyways: about that hurting brain, I know some people and all they wanna do is eat.. ok, i'll stop now and won't post anymore until I got some sleep.

Also remember that CYMK and RGB versions are completely different. RGB for colours on screen, CYMK for colours on paper.