Color: Physics and Perception?

#31
(Jan 2, 2020 03:10 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: OMG! I just reread that old thread. How embarrassing.
 
Meh, nothing mortifying like that. I may have been looking at a later one than what you're referencing (not posting a link to it). Came across it in the course of putting any slim details in general search I could vaguely recollect about that fellow, because I did recall a video or site or blog or tweet or something about him from quite(?) a while aback.

Quote:I was forum virgin. I’d never even spoke to a stranger online before. Yeah, I was bored as hell. Went back to work but I didn’t really need the money. So, I wanted to do something fun. I worked at a winery, but my girlfriend that I helped with her daughter’s wedding, she ended up buying that ranch. We’re doing events now.

We all remember our own spastic days of first stumbling around on the web. Undecided

My nyms on a service with its own firewalled groups were things like "Ms 4-ize", Anna Gogic, NetherGirl, Triss Kaideka, etc. And in typical noob fashion I thought nobody else in the world was using _X_ (which might well have been the case on there, which is the only realm I ever used such -- that service long since expired and nothing was stored after a month or two, anyway -- routinely obliterated). 

I must have subconsciously gleaned from many women writers using initials and ambiguous pen names to go with something like that right off the bat on the rest of the internet, even though by that time it probably wasn't necessary (heck, I'm still doing it).

Quote:As for the the black line, it’s the black separation line between the red and blue but it’s not due to the background being black. Like I said earlier, it even does it with the red and cyan.


[Image: 49278321151_ded7b205c5_w.jpg]


Red and cyan on white photo…


[Image: 49316916401_1aa1c933a4_z.jpg]

[...] I know the cause of the black line now and I’m fairly confident that I can prove and explain it ...with and without mathematics. If I’m wrong, I’d be the catch of the decade. Ha-ha, fish, as my son would say, but if I’m right, that would make him one hell of a storyteller (in a good way). [...]

I can't dig or groove to "black line" even at 300% magnification on any of those (although one of them seems to have a boundary where I might see how it could appear black or at least grayscale territory if maybe the image was shrunk enough). So I'm guessing this is either a graphics rendering problem, a perceptual deficiency on my part, or one needs the direct experience of looking through a prism for some of these effects.

That's why I need to bow out and leave it to either the visually gifted or those with the paraphenalia and hobby interest to experiment. This has been an interesting topic to read and to yet check on as it progresses. Would still be keen to hear your explanation whenever it's officially released to the public.

Quote:There’s more to the story, though, C C, a lot more. He has a blog, a new one. At first, I thought he was just a crank and that I’d toss him a bone, but over the years, he’s posted a few good rebuttals. Unfortunately, it’s been a struggle for me to keep a lid on my sarcasm. Imagine that.  Big Grin

At one point, he exclaimed "Checkmate". I told him to print out the word, place the prism over the top, move his eye downward and watch his little "Checkmate" disappear. Total internal reflection; I thought it was funny and clever but whoo-wee…he was pissed.

His name is Remus and he lives in Australia. He used to resort to ad hominem attacks but he stopped doing that a few years ago. His modus operandi now is to ignore me until I grovel but there’s a slight chance that he could have been affected by the fires. I’ll hit him up again and invite him to join because it is his story after all. Who knows? Maybe he’ll change his mind. He’s stubborn, though. 

Didn't figure he really was into SPECTRE or had the traits and goals of certain characters from the oldest James Bond movies. Any obstinate and stodgy demeanor is more or less an expected norm. 

Quote:I have to finish moving my son. I’ll be returning on the 14th. I’ll show you some interesting photos when I return, and hopefully, I’ll hear from Mr. Poradin by then.

Thanks again for listening, C C!

Best wishes with his new residence. Take care, SS.
Reply
#32
I haven’t heard from Mr. Poradin yet. Funny thing is, though, I posted my observations here on Decemebr 31st. He posted his here on January 8th. Kind of suspicious, eh?

The synchronicity runs deep with this one. I’ve had to apologize on several occasions. To be honest, if there weren’t so many coincidences, I wouldn’t have because I’m just as stubborn.

He asked me why I had relented. I said, "Chain of events, I suppose." He said that he relented because everybody deserves a second chance. Some deserve even more than that and a few deserve as many chances given as the number of their trespasses.

A while back, I shared this quote with him.

"Will nothing beyond your capacity: there is a wicked falseness among those who will beyond their capacity.
Especially when they will great things! For they arouse mistrust against great things, these fine counterfeiters and actors—
--until at last they are false before themselves, cross-eyed, white-washed worm food. Cloaked by strong words, by showy virtues, by gleaming false works.
Be very careful there, you higher men! For I regard nothing more precious and rare today than honesty."
—Nietzsche

And then he shared this story with me.

Plato, the great Greek philosopher, used to invite on weekends many prominent Athenians to his magnificent villa for a soiree where elaborate discussions about art, science and philosophy were the uncompromising norm. On one of those occasions, along the usual retinue of people that used to come every week he also invited someone who, although more famous than most others, was a totally antisocial hermit. The person in question was none other than Diogenes, who was the antithetical counterpart of Plato in basically all respects. Unlike Plato, who was immensely rich and lived in opulent luxury, Diogenes was the poorest of the poor and lived in a barrel. Anyway, when Diogenes arrived at the party--barefoot, full of mud and stinky--he began stomping vigorously on the white Persian rugs with his muddy feet and declared loudly for all to hear: "I'm walking on Plato's vanity!" To which Plato replied: "With a vanity just as great."

Every physics professor that specialized in optics agreed with my answer on the question of why the spectrum was reversed when looking through a prism. He said that he prayed for his answer. I studied.

Quote:If I only managed to get one reply from a conventional physicist, the American lady who had written to me about her obsession with the inverted spectrum had more luck. In the month of January 2010 I received a great number of emails from her, in which she was informing me that she had written to a number of physicists—mainly professors specialised in optics—and that quite a few of them had replied to her request for an official explanation about what causes the inverted spectrum seen in subjective experiments. Curiously, a few of the physicists she had contacted were not aware of the phenomenon! A couple of those she had written to were so helpful, on the other hand, that they offered her their cell numbers (presumably for a thorough analysis), although I have no information about how that most kind gesture eventuated. The most important thing I was to learn from her, however, was that a few of those contacted had apparently expressed their belief that the explanation developed by the lady was the correct one. Now, the truth is that I wouldn't have believed that if I did not see with my own eyes that at least one such Professor (from Berkeley, of all places) indeed replied unambiguously: “I think your answer is correct”. (I forgot to mention that the American lady—who asked me not to divulge her name—had attached to each of her requests a diagram depicting her explanation.) Having seen the diagram myself I could not believe that a physicist (any physicist) would possibly agree that that “explanation” could be correct. But I was definitely wrong on that. Professor Charles Schwartz (Berkeley, if you can believe it...)thinks that that “explanation” is correct. With such a backup, as you can imagine, the American lady found this opportunity too hard to resist, and in a couple of long emails she began to speak in statements, to fraternise with me about how it feels to be wrong, to mention in passing that she knew that certain things I misunderstood, to express her sympathy for the fact that I had worked so hard for nothing etc. etc. And that's when I decided to show you that explanation (not “explanation” because now it has credentials).

Naturally, I sent the American lady an email: “I'll discuss very soon your explanation for the inverted spectrum on my website. Keep you posted”.

If my answer regarding the reverse spectrum is incorrect, I’ll be forced to publicly apologize but that’s the least of my concerns because the argument itself has revolved around…well, you know who. That coupled with the spooky action at a distance (synchronicity) would really-really fuck with my mind.  Sad
Reply
#33
(Jan 16, 2020 07:33 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: ...Every physics professor that specialized in optics agreed with my answer on the question of why the spectrum was reversed when looking through a prism. He said that he prayed for his answer. I studied. ...


Maybe a tad reminiscent of the autodidactic mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan attributing insights to his family's goddess Namagiri Thayar (as revealed via dreams or whatever). But in reality he'd never have gotten off the ground without stumbling upon Carr's Synopsis of Pure Mathematics as a foundation for triggering and feeding his inventive imagination.

You truly should feel pleased, SS. Not only working to figure this out but recognizing that this guy had seized upon a potential mystery that it sounds like others were dismissing without reflection as crank territory. (I'd fall in that slot.)

I certainly don't mean to knock him off the pedestal -- as much as I can gather you both contributed in different ways or interactions and deserve to be there. You fanned the flames and hopefully (should it not be official fact yet) produced a solution or at least being a co-maker of it, or however that settles in the end. Good work, detective Phryne Fisher. Smile
Reply
#34
The black line thingy was still bugging me. So, I emailed this guy with this website. He's an artist but his studies on the subject were pretty extensive. His answer sounds like it could actually be correct. He sent me the diagram below. When I look through the prism, I see green, as well, though, but maybe I’m only seeing green because the blue shifts leaving the green behind. 

There’s one more artist in Australia that’s extremely knowledgeable on the topic. I might ask him, too. If he comes up with the same answer, I’ll be more satisfied. 

Quote:yes, if you view a light source through a prism, then the blue end of the spectrum will appear toward the pointed corner rather than the flat side of the prism. if you project the light source through the prism onto a wall, then the blue end will appear on the flat side rather than the pointed side of the prism. the reason the spectrum is reversed is because the convergence point of the image is in your eye rather than in the prism. (see diagram.)

the "black line" appears clearly in your figure c.jpg, on the pointed side of the prism, either underneath or alongside the red bar (depending on whether you hold the prism horizontally or vertically). if you hold the prism vertically, then the black line appears below the cyan line that forms over the white. the reason there is a gap there is because there is no green light in the diagram, only blue and red light. so yes, the black results because light is filtered out, but it's filtered out in your diagram, not in the prism.


best,
bruce

[Image: 50052635396_2fc33da4fc.jpg]
Reply
#35
Well, that didn’t go over so well. Is it sexist to just say, "men"? Rolleyes  

Yeah, maybe. I'll retract it then.  Big Grin


ME: That sounds good but then how do you explain the green next to the black line.

Quote:there is no green next to the red line bordered by black.

there may be green next to the red line bordered by white, because "white" on a computer monitor is an equal mixture of red, green and blue diodes. there is green light to see.

the red area utilizes the red video primary light only, and the blue area utilizes the blue video primary light only. there is no green light.

ME: I took a picture of it through my prism. There's magenta on the left side (blue and red create magenta) and there is green and black on the right side.

Quote:send me the picture

ME: I did, but here it is again.


[Image: 50064561613_2d1abba547_w.jpg]


[Image: 50065359927_a14d936d95_n.jpg]


Quote:part of your problem is that your "red" is actually an orange or red orange that contains a huge amount of green light. your "blue" has the same problem. (see attached.)

the other part of your problem is that the diodes do not stop emitting entirely, so there will always be a very small amount of green in every color, even when the nominal setting is zero. that is, if you set your monitor to a "black" image that completely fills the screen, you will see the screen in the dark.

THOUGHT BUBBLE* {No. My red is set at 255, blue 0, green, 0. Blue 255, red 0, green 0.}

ME: I made sure that I set the green value to zero.

Quote:well, i measured the color values in the image you sent, and they are recorded as the RGB values in the image i returned. your "red" and "blue" contain a substantial amount of green. and, as i explained, when the video is "on" the diodes are never completely "off", which explains the (very small) green evident in my image.

THOUGHT BUBBLE* {Really? That’s strange because like I said, that is picture of my computer monitor taken through a prism with the green set at zero. And you just got finished saying that the reason that I’m seeing black is because there is no green. Grab a prism and take a look for yourself.}

ME: I wish that it was that easy but the same thing can be seen with objects and pigments, as well.

Quote:all pigments are broadband reflectors, every wavelength is reflected by some amount, no matter what the color is. get some colored marker pens and examine the inks for yourself. Newton's "Opticks" discusses many of the same phenomena with simple experiments to observe them. you should start there.

THOUGHT BUBBLE* {But you just got finished saying that the reason that I’m seeing black is because there is no green at all. Weird!}

I was thinking about asking this guy next but maybe I should try to find a female.  Undecided
Reply
#36
(Jul 1, 2020 02:33 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [...] I emailed this guy with this website. He's an artist but his studies on the subject were pretty extensive. [...] There’s one more artist in Australia that’s extremely knowledgeable on the topic. I might ask him, too. If he comes up with the same answer, I’ll be more satisfied.

[...] Well, that didn’t go over so well. Is it sexist to just say, "men"? Rolleyes  

Yeah, maybe. I'll retract it then.  Big Grin

[...] I was thinking about asking this guy next but maybe I should try to find a female.  Undecided

Probably contributing heavily, also, regardless of gender, is the skepticism generated from feeling that the "establishment" can't possibly be wrong in its explanations. Or that the accounts are deeply sufficient and broad-ranging with respect to never overlooking any anomalies. "Begone thou outlandish shadow! There are no puzzlements here that fail to be addressed head-on, nor do solutions loiter in remote, rural outskirts far from the din of popularity."

I slipped down the slope of that lavish confidence in the reach of authority earlier in the thread.
Reply
#37
Sorry, C C. I was out exploring.

Yeah, you’re probably right. I think he tried to answer the question without looking first. I think I'll give that other guy a shot. I just want the correct answer but I think my sarcasm is a bit of a hinderance. I gotta work on that. Big Grin
Reply
#38
I usually avoid this place because they’re highly sensitive and a little snooty but at least one person actually has a prism. I’ll have to curb my sarcasm though. This could be rough.   Undecided

Hopefully, someone can pull an answer from their hat. Fingers crossed. 

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/th...on.990984/
Reply
#39
(Jul 5, 2020 12:03 AM)Secular Sanity Wrote: I usually avoid this place because they’re highly sensitive and a little snooty but at least one person actually has a prism. I’ll have to curb my sarcasm though. This could be rough.   Undecided

Hopefully, someone can pull an answer from their hat. Fingers crossed. 

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/th...on.990984/

So... wha... uh... huh...? Is that some kind of analysis of the image file itself that they're resorting to now?

Back at an early stage I did prod and poke a pic in an image editor and may have even split it into RGB channels -- but after some thought it seemed ridiculous and utterly pointless to mention. Because both the screen image and the agonizingly long "code" underlying it wasn't the original physical environment set-up and its product reaching the eyes. Just an altered creature of compressed digital data along with the varying quirks of mediating technology delivering it. (That said, however, NASA experts and astronomers do draw amazing inferences from electronic representations crossing millions/billions of miles from space probes.)

Probably time to find a local expert or very informed hobbyist who is actually visitable in your area and take the prism slash "experiment" physically to her/his "lab" or whatever tangible, concrete playground. Rather than lugging around these substitute, long-distance entities inhabiting computers and the internet. Perhaps the physics forum has unintentionally(?) exposed that as an impediment to progress (if "progress" is arriving at a final, unimpeachable consensus about _X_).

Oh, yeah... Forgot about the social distancing tacked on to the lack of advertising in the yellow pages and zero facebook account. Along with whoever it is probably being like a neurotic, hypochondriac Kyle Schwartz about the whole issue: "Contact me again three years from now after I'm convinced of the effectiveness of the vaccine.")
Reply
#40
(Jul 7, 2020 07:12 AM)C C Wrote: Probably time to find a local expert or very informed hobbyist who is actually visitable in your area and take the prism slash "experiment" physically to her/his "lab" or whatever tangible, concrete playground. Rather than lugging around these substitute, long-distance entities inhabiting computers and the internet.

That’s what I was hoping for with the guy from that website. He lives near me but he was sort of grumpy old fart. I still have a trick or two hidden up my sleeve but it’s so difficult tiptoeing around each individual ego. After doing so, 'Jeter des perles aux pourceaux' starts playing in my head. 

I thought I was off to a good start because after corresponding with that artist that supplied the image in post #34, I realized that I needed to address the image location. I had previously commented on this video from Khan Academy. The video makes it sound like the reversed spectrum is caused because the blue and red rays cross over in the middle section in front of the prism, but when they do that, they merge and create white light. We only see the reversed spectrum at the edges where they don’t overlap. If the actual light rays themselves crossed over and converged to form the image, the image would be a real image and inverted. But the image is formed behind the prism where they simply appear to overlap when we trace them back, making it a virtual image.

I tried to point that out to the artist but it didn’t go over well…
Me: I took a course on ray tracing. It’s a virtual image. Real images are those where the light rays actually converge, similar to your depiction, whereas virtual images are locations from where light appears to have converged when we trace the rays back, hence, the displacement.

Bruce: i'm afraid i would not pass you in my ray tracing course. real images, such as those on the back of your eye, are images that can do work -- affect a photosensor, tickle your retina, expose a film emulsion. the light passed by a pinhole converges at the pinhole, not at the projection screen, but the image on the screen can still do work, for example as a pinhole camera. a virtual image, for example your image in a mirror, does not require convergence at the image but on your retina. the key point is that a virtual image cannot do work, no matter where it forms or appears to form. in order to understand how the spectrum image forms you have to trace the separate red and blue content of the dispersion from the source through the prism to the pinhole of your iris, and once you do that it is clear that you cannot see both the red and blue ends of the spectrum (and everything in between) from the same single "ray," and the error in the diagram you sent me is then easy to see.

The virtual image serves as an object for the lens on your eye to produce a real image onto your retina.


C C Wrote:Perhaps the physics forum has unintentionally(?) exposed that as an impediment to progress (if "progress" is arriving at a final, unimpeachable consensus about _X_).

Yeah, that one at the end just brushed it off without any explanation. And then he/she had to top it off by mockingly saying that if you had two pure sources then the whole Universe would shake if you didn't get a predictable result.

I don’t think that’s true though, and my explanation follows the conventional theory. It’s just a little quirk that nobody has picked up on.

That one though, Ibix is correct in saying that the green channel has an extra structure and that is doesn’t seem to associated with either of the red or blue channels. I’m pretty sure that I have devised a way to prove this and fairly confident that I can explain exactly what is happening. You’re right though, it’s going to be very difficult to get past all the popular misconceptions. 

Hell, I don’t even care if I’m wrong. I just want the correct explanation.  Undecided
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Why Physics Is Not a Discipline: Physics is not just what occurs in Dept of Physics C C 0 701 Apr 23, 2016 05:46 AM
Last Post: C C



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)