I had a conversation with Lee Young the other day, and we were debating on the existence of colours.
What exists? How do we define “existence”? The Oxford advanced learner’s dictionary defines it as “the state or fact of being real or living or of being present”.
Are colours real? The colours we see are actually electromagnetic waves of different wavelengths interpreted by our brain as colours. To have a better understanding of this logic, consider the statement: “Red is an electromagnetic wave.” It is known that the colour ‘red’ has a wavelength of 685nm and different wavelengths in the ‘visible light’ range within the electromagnetic spectrum is associated with different ‘colours’.
In a nutshell, colours are not real because its an outcome of how our brain interprets electromagnetic waves.
To investigate the accuracy of this argument, lets conduct a simple thought experiment.
Consider the premise: “Bush exists.”
Political aficionados will instinctively interpret the data “Bush” as the President of the United States. While those who are inclined towards the environment will think about the plant. Do you see the link? The data “Bush” represents the stimulus (Electromagnetic waves) while the interpretation of data represents the outcome (Colour). Based on the analogy given, we can deduce that colours do exist.
The notion of ‘colours’ is equivalent to how we label different objects with different names. If you are still not convinced, how do you explain the existence of the English language? I believe that we can agree that words comprises of different letters in different combinations. Thus, to challenge the existence of colours is tantamount to the denial of the existence of language itself.
Since “Bush” exists, colours exists.
Imagine that all things that are green are not green. Then do that one by one with all the other colors. Now where are all the colors? They’re all gone.
But electromagnetic waves are real.
Colours is a representation of the information our brains receive.
“Green” is associated to electromagnetic waves of a certain wavelength. Imagining it doesn’t exist does not deny its existence.
However, I am still contemplating the true definition of “Existence”.
Thank you for your input.
Hi, Nice blog.. though i’m still figuring out whether i’m exist…
may be 1 day,u cant say ‘color’ dunot exist(lyk wat u deny).De existence of any thing is not forever,must be changed with de time…my view is,red color 4 me do not exist 4 snake or other type of creature!de interpretion of de brain do not be de same in all creatures.Existance of ‘color’is dependant of de existant of sumthing dat can detect de stimuli of electrowaves.Yes, electomagnetic waves can exist in certain condition only,if in de black hole,they do not exist ,so color oso lyk dat.if we give sumthing a definition 4 its existance,shud we be universary?Yes,!So, u cant deny dat color do not exist !but , u can agree dat color ‘exist’ in de mind,a virtual world!
You clarified something chee: color only exists in our minds. Doesn’t that prove that everything only exists in our minds?
Well we are arguing over the existence of colour in the real, physical world but not with the english language. Based on your argument, anything that is unproven must be true because the language exists in itself.
Does God exist simply because there’s a word “God” in my Oxford English Dictionary? Well, no.
haha,funny.den god exist?haha,existence mean the state or fact of being real or living or of being present. haha,u noe god exist leh,how u prove dats?so can u prove existance of color using de method used to prove existance of god??
After some thought, it still boils down to how you define “existence”.
Actually I did not say that something unproven is true because of the existence of the word. Who would make sure a hilarious statement? Haha.
I was just trying to say that there are different ways of interpreting various “information”.
There is no doubt that all the senses we ‘feel’ are in the mind. However, colour is a way our brains proves the existence of visible light waves.
Just like X-rays, it may not be visible to us, but the usage of a X-ray machine to produce X-ray images is to prove the existence of X-rays. But the X-ray images do exist.
Well of course, there won’t be a X-ray image unless we use or senses to perceive it because in actual fact, it is just a gigantic combination of atoms.
Yes, if we do not have a mind, our surroundings are nothing but atoms, molecules, forces and energy.
‘However, colour is a way our brains proves the existence of visible light waves.’
Point for you Peter.
Yeah. But in this physical world, as we know, there’s nothing such as colours- because it is a mere interpretation in our brain, a way we interprets and perceives the environment.
It is indeed true that our surroundings are nothing but atoms and energy- our brain makes it interesting- and more importantly, it is vital for survival.
Regarding to pochp’s quote,
Well, our brains (or us) don’t really proves the existence of visible light waves. Our brains only cope with that particular wavelengths of electromagnetic waves because, as I’ve mentioned, it is vital for survival. How can we say that “red’ is visible when insects can’t perceive it? If we don’t need to perceive light rays to survive, then there will not be a “visible light” spectrum in the midst of the EM spectrum. Actually, visible light waves is just a representation of the environment that we happen to live in. For instance, insects’ “visible light waves” extends up to Ultraviolet waves- that’s because their niche deals with Ultraviolet light.
I’m not sure yet if this will help. I found it from Wikipedia:
Goethe from Steiner,
“The colours therefore, to begin with, make their appearance purely and simply as phenomena at the border between light and dark…”
Colours arise at the borders, where light and dark flow together.”
Click here for a visual representation.
Goethe seems to have thought of light and dark in terms of a metaphysical dualism, from whose interaction color is born.
Newton held that white light passing through a prism is diffused into its various wavelengths. He also may have steered the discussion into wave-particle duality.
See Also: Wikipedia’s article, Physics Today article on his experiments, Goethe’s color triangle.
I forgot to add I understand you Lee. Thanks.