• shneancy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    ah a similar explanation to why yellow is not an actual colour either

    the silly explanation that has no effect on how we perceive, use, or think about colour. sigh why are the people responsible for those studies calling those colours not real? Why not just colours resulting from mixing other colours like the artists have done since the invention of paint?

    • chuckleslord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Sorry for the confusion. Yellow is a single wavelength of light. We perceive it with the green and red receptors in our eyes, but it is a single wavelength. Purple isn’t a single wavelength, but two that are being interpreted as a color.

      That was the distinction I was calling out.

      • shneancy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        and that is why i didn’t say the same explanation, but similar

        both, in my opinion, suffer from the clickbait disease “YOU CAN’T SEE YELLOW 😱” (directly, because to see it you use two light receptors combined) “PURPLE DOESN’T EXIST 😱” (as a single wavelength colour because as opposed to the other colours of the rainbow it uses a combination of red and blue wavelengths)

        i don’t blame you for either of course, i’m just expressing my general annoyance with the phrasing of both science facts