> On Apr 18, 11:04 am, "aga...[at]erols.com" <aga...[at]erols.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 15, 10:30 pm, "Dr Judy" <mpac...[at]rogers.com> wrote:
> > > On Apr 15, 4:51 pm, "aga...[at]erols.com" <aga...[at]erols.com> wrote:
> > > > I am endeavoring to resolve some classic comix bad science with a
> > > > handy real science explanation.
> > > > However I seem to be experiencing difficulty getting my point across
> > > > on rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
> > > > Perceived color correlates not to light wavelength, but to ratio of
> > > > wavelengths. Even different wavelengths in similar ratios can be
> > > > perceived as similar color. And the perceived colors include yellow.
> > > Not true unless the observer has a colour defect. Perceived colour in
> > > humans correlates to the relative amount of stimulation to three
> > > different photoreceptor chemicals, each of which has a different
> > > sensitivity to different wavelengths in the visible spectrum
> > > (maximally sensitive to red, blue and green). A number of different
> > > colours would be named "yellow" and would range in colour from gray
> > > yellow to green yellow to yellow orange to yellow brown.
> > > The sensitivities of the pigments are such that all the pigments
> > > respond to yellow light, so for yellow to be perceived, all the
> > > pigments must be stimulated. So "yellow" may be a range of say 20% to
> > > 40% stimulation of "red detecting" chemical AND 20% to 40% stimulation
> > > of "blue detecting" chemical AND 40% to 100% stimulation "green
> > > detecting" chemical. (I'm just making these ratios up, you could use
> > > the graphs of actual pigments to calculate it precisely)
> > > > Infra-yellow, then, refers neither simply to orange nor to entirely
> > > > new spectral coordinates or exotic quantum characteristics of photons,
> > > > but rather to different non visible radiation wavelength emissions
> > > > within ratios similar to those in which visible light is perceived as
> > > > yellow.
> > > If you define "infra-yellow" as emissions in the non visible range,
> > > then none of the human photo detecting chemicals will be stimulated,
> > > no light will be detected and no colour will be perceived. In other
> > > words, the ratio would be 0/0/0
> > > Generally, optical scientists use the prefix "infra" to mean to
> > > "longer wavelengths than". So they would interpret the term "infra
> > > yellow" to mean orange, red and beyond.
> > > > Hence the invisible infra-yellow has the similar nullifying effects
> > > > upon power ring energies as visible yellow light and pigments.
> > > > That so many utterly different sapient species are capable to
> > > > perceive yellow, the wavelength ratios upon which power rings have no
> > > > effect, is often cited as evidentiary support for Intelligent Design
> > > > throughout the galaxies.
> > > Now you have lost me.
> > > However, as a confirmed disbeliever in Intelligent Design and a firm
> > > believer in evolution, let me offer this:
> > > Earth based life forms all perceive yellow because they all evolved
> > > from blue green algae which developed the first photosensitive cell
> > > chemisty and those chemicals were maximally sensitive to wavelengths
> > > that we perceive as "yellow".
> > > You might be interested to know that many non human earth based life
> > > forms like birds and insects can perceive colour in the ultraviolet
> > > range, colours that have a 0/0/0 ratio for humans and are thus
> > > invisible to humans.
> > > Judy
> > You do speak of chemical ratios within the eye, corresponding to the
> > different color perceptions. Indeed, rods and cones do not respond
> > each only to a particular range of wavelength or color. Rather they
> > each respond to the entire visible spectrum, but each to a particular
> > range, more strongly. Colors as perceive are, indeed, a function of
> > the ratios of response.
> Each pigment does not respond across the entire visible spectrum.

> See
> the graph of reponses in:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_vision

> And if the light is not in the visible spectrum, there is no response
> and no ratio.
Obviously, there can be no vissual response to the unseen. But there

> > Now, returning to my Science Fiction speculation, I propose that for a
> > being with vission in a different range, perhaps colors including
> > yellow might nevertheless be perceived, likewise, from a ration, or as
> > the F-sharp Bell might think of it, an harmonic, of the correct ratio.
> > Hence infra or ultra yellow! Can you do better??
> But if the cones don't respond at all as the light source is beyond
> the visible spectrum there is no ratio. Insects response to
> ultraviolet light, humans don't. Compared to insects, we are the
> being with vision in a different range, UV is "yellow" and we don't
> see it. The ratio of response of our photoreceptors to UV is 0/0/0.- Hide quoted

> - Show quoted text -

> On Apr 15, 3:51 pm, "aga...[at]erols.com" <aga...[at]erols.com> wrote:
> > This message is or should be legitimately cross posted to
> > sci.med.vision and rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
> > So please make sure that all responses are, likewise, cross posted
> > both to sci.med.vision and rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
> > I am endeavoring to resolve some classic comix bad science with a
> > handy real science explanation.
> > However I seem to be experiencing difficulty getting my point across
> > on rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
> > So I am now appealing for help and clarification on sci.med.vision.
> > Thanks!
> > ======
> > Perceived color correlates not to light wavelength, but to ratio of
> > wavelengths. Even different wavelengths in similar ratios can be
> > perceived as similar color. And the perceived colors include yellow.
> > Infra-yellow, then, refers neither simply to orange nor to entirely
> > new spectral coordinates or exotic quantum characteristics of photons,
> > but rather to different non visible radiation wavelength emissions
> > within ratios similar to those in which visible light is perceived as
> > yellow.
> > Hence the invisible infra-yellow has the similar nullifying effects
> > upon power ring energies as visible yellow light and pigments.
> > That so many utterly different sapient species are capable to
> > perceive yellow, the wavelength ratios upon which power rings have no
> > effect, is often cited as evidentiary support for Intelligent Design
> > throughout the galaxies.
> So is this all a reference to the classic "invisible yellow force
> field" from the old issue of Green Lantern? It seems that you're
> stating that there might truly be energy that has "yellow" qualities
> that would not be perceived by the human eye, thus "invisible yellow".- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -

> On Apr 15, 10:30 pm, "Dr Judy" <mpac...[at]rogers.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 15, 4:51 pm, "aga...[at]erols.com" <aga...[at]erols.com> wrote:
> > > I am endeavoring to resolve some classic comix bad science with a
> > > handy real science explanation.
> > > However I seem to be experiencing difficulty getting my point across
> > > on rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
> > > Perceived color correlates not to light wavelength, but to ratio of
> > > wavelengths. Even different wavelengths in similar ratios can be
> > > perceived as similar color. And the perceived colors include yellow.
> > Not true unless the observer has a colour defect. Perceived colour in
> > humans correlates to the relative amount of stimulation to three
> > different photoreceptor chemicals, each of which has a different
> > sensitivity to different wavelengths in the visible spectrum
> > (maximally sensitive to red, blue and green). A number of different
> > colours would be named "yellow" and would range in colour from gray
> > yellow to green yellow to yellow orange to yellow brown.
> > The sensitivities of the pigments are such that all the pigments
> > respond to yellow light, so for yellow to be perceived, all the
> > pigments must be stimulated. So "yellow" may be a range of say 20% to
> > 40% stimulation of "red detecting" chemical AND 20% to 40% stimulation
> > of "blue detecting" chemical AND 40% to 100% stimulation "green
> > detecting" chemical. (I'm just making these ratios up, you could use
> > the graphs of actual pigments to calculate it precisely)
> > > Infra-yellow, then, refers neither simply to orange nor to entirely
> > > new spectral coordinates or exotic quantum characteristics of photons,
> > > but rather to different non visible radiation wavelength emissions
> > > within ratios similar to those in which visible light is perceived as
> > > yellow.
> > If you define "infra-yellow" as emissions in the non visible range,
> > then none of the human photo detecting chemicals will be stimulated,
> > no light will be detected and no colour will be perceived. In other
> > words, the ratio would be 0/0/0
> > Generally, optical scientists use the prefix "infra" to mean to
> > "longer wavelengths than". So they would interpret the term "infra
> > yellow" to mean orange, red and beyond.
> > > Hence the invisible infra-yellow has the similar nullifying effects
> > > upon power ring energies as visible yellow light and pigments.
> > > That so many utterly different sapient species are capable to
> > > perceive yellow, the wavelength ratios upon which power rings have no
> > > effect, is often cited as evidentiary support for Intelligent Design
> > > throughout the galaxies.
> > Now you have lost me.
> > However, as a confirmed disbeliever in Intelligent Design and a firm
> > believer in evolution, let me offer this:
> > Earth based life forms all perceive yellow because they all evolved
> > from blue green algae which developed the first photosensitive cell
> > chemisty and those chemicals were maximally sensitive to wavelengths
> > that we perceive as "yellow".
> > You might be interested to know that many non human earth based life
> > forms like birds and insects can perceive colour in the ultraviolet
> > range, colours that have a 0/0/0 ratio for humans and are thus
> > invisible to humans.
> > Judy
> You do speak of chemical ratios within the eye, corresponding to the
> different color perceptions. Indeed, rods and cones do not respond
> each only to a particular range of wavelength or color. Rather they
> each respond to the entire visible spectrum, but each to a particular
> range, more strongly. Colors as perceive are, indeed, a function of
> the ratios of response.

> Now, returning to my Science Fiction speculation, I propose that for a
> being with vission in a different range, perhaps colors including
> yellow might nevertheless be perceived, likewise, from a ration, or as
> the F-sharp Bell might think of it, an harmonic, of the correct ratio.
> Hence infra or ultra yellow! Can you do better??

> This message is or should be legitimately cross posted to
> sci.med.vision and rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
> So please make sure that all responses are, likewise, cross posted
> both to sci.med.vision and rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
> I am endeavoring to resolve some classic comix bad science with a
> handy real science explanation.
> However I seem to be experiencing difficulty getting my point across
> on rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
> So I am now appealing for help and clarification on sci.med.vision.
> Thanks!
> ======
> Perceived color correlates not to light wavelength, but to ratio of
> wavelengths. Even different wavelengths in similar ratios can be
> perceived as similar color. And the perceived colors include yellow.
> Infra-yellow, then, refers neither simply to orange nor to entirely
> new spectral coordinates or exotic quantum characteristics of photons,
> but rather to different non visible radiation wavelength emissions
> within ratios similar to those in which visible light is perceived as
> yellow.
> Hence the invisible infra-yellow has the similar nullifying effects
> upon power ring energies as visible yellow light and pigments.
> That so many utterly different sapient species are capable to
> perceive yellow, the wavelength ratios upon which power rings have no
> effect, is often cited as evidentiary support for Intelligent Design
> throughout the galaxies.

> On Apr 15, 4:51 pm, "aga...[at]erols.com" <aga...[at]erols.com> wrote:
> > I am endeavoring to resolve some classic comix bad science with a
> > handy real science explanation.
> > However I seem to be experiencing difficulty getting my point across
> > on rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
> > Perceived color correlates not to light wavelength, but to ratio of
> > wavelengths. Even different wavelengths in similar ratios can be
> > perceived as similar color. And the perceived colors include yellow.
> Not true unless the observer has a colour defect. Perceived colour in
> humans correlates to the relative amount of stimulation to three
> different photoreceptor chemicals, each of which has a different
> sensitivity to different wavelengths in the visible spectrum
> (maximally sensitive to red, blue and green). A number of different
> colours would be named "yellow" and would range in colour from gray
> yellow to green yellow to yellow orange to yellow brown.
> The sensitivities of the pigments are such that all the pigments
> respond to yellow light, so for yellow to be perceived, all the
> pigments must be stimulated. So "yellow" may be a range of say 20% to
> 40% stimulation of "red detecting" chemical AND 20% to 40% stimulation
> of "blue detecting" chemical AND 40% to 100% stimulation "green
> detecting" chemical. (I'm just making these ratios up, you could use
> the graphs of actual pigments to calculate it precisely)
> > Infra-yellow, then, refers neither simply to orange nor to entirely
> > new spectral coordinates or exotic quantum characteristics of photons,
> > but rather to different non visible radiation wavelength emissions
> > within ratios similar to those in which visible light is perceived as
> > yellow.
> If you define "infra-yellow" as emissions in the non visible range,
> then none of the human photo detecting chemicals will be stimulated,
> no light will be detected and no colour will be perceived. In other
> words, the ratio would be 0/0/0
> Generally, optical scientists use the prefix "infra" to mean to
> "longer wavelengths than". So they would interpret the term "infra
> yellow" to mean orange, red and beyond.
> > Hence the invisible infra-yellow has the similar nullifying effects
> > upon power ring energies as visible yellow light and pigments.
> > That so many utterly different sapient species are capable to
> > perceive yellow, the wavelength ratios upon which power rings have no
> > effect, is often cited as evidentiary support for Intelligent Design
> > throughout the galaxies.
> Now you have lost me.
> However, as a confirmed disbeliever in Intelligent Design and a firm
> believer in evolution, let me offer this:
> Earth based life forms all perceive yellow because they all evolved
> from blue green algae which developed the first photosensitive cell
> chemisty and those chemicals were maximally sensitive to wavelengths
> that we perceive as "yellow".
> You might be interested to know that many non human earth based life
> forms like birds and insects can perceive colour in the ultraviolet
> range, colours that have a 0/0/0 ratio for humans and are thus
> invisible to humans.
> Judy

> I am endeavoring to resolve some classic comix bad science with a
> handy real science explanation.
> However I seem to be experiencing difficulty getting my point across
> on rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
> Perceived color correlates not to light wavelength, but to ratio of
> wavelengths. Even different wavelengths in similar ratios can be
> perceived as similar color. And the perceived colors include yellow.

> Infra-yellow, then, refers neither simply to orange nor to entirely
> new spectral coordinates or exotic quantum characteristics of photons,
> but rather to different non visible radiation wavelength emissions
> within ratios similar to those in which visible light is perceived as
> yellow.

> Hence the invisible infra-yellow has the similar nullifying effects
> upon power ring energies as visible yellow light and pigments.
> That so many utterly different sapient species are capable to
> perceive yellow, the wavelength ratios upon which power rings have no
> effect, is often cited as evidentiary support for Intelligent Design
> throughout the galaxies.

> On Apr 15, 3:51 pm, "aga...[at]erols.com" <aga...[at]erols.com> wrote:
> > This message is or should be legitimately cross posted to
> > sci.med.vision and rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
> > So please make sure that all responses are, likewise, cross posted
> > both to sci.med.vision and rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
> > I am endeavoring to resolve some classic comix bad science with a
> > handy real science explanation.
> > However I seem to be experiencing difficulty getting my point across
> > on rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
> > So I am now appealing for help and clarification on sci.med.vision.
> > Thanks!
> > ======
> Why?
> Just wondering,
> Tom- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -

> This message is or should be legitimately cross posted to
> sci.med.vision and rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
> So please make sure that all responses are, likewise, cross posted
> both to sci.med.vision and rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
> I am endeavoring to resolve some classic comix bad science with a
> handy real science explanation.
> However I seem to be experiencing difficulty getting my point across
> on rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
> So I am now appealing for help and clarification on sci.med.vision.
> Thanks!
> ======