On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:58:06 -0500, "pico" <pico.pico.net> wrote:
> >"Peter Bruells" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message >news:email@example.com... >> Prisoner at War <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: >> >>> On Oct 14, 7:14 am, Peter Bruells <user...@rogue.de> wrote: > >>> Well, now you're just playing with semantics. >> >> No. I don't. Even if an alien looks into a light source of a given >> frequency, he will not see "red". What he will see will be dependent >> on his eye, his visual cortex, his evolution and is cultural >> upbringing. > >Nonsense. You are playing with words. It doesn't matter whatsoever what >anyone calls the perception of light in the bandwidth we call "red" as long >as it is discreet, not commingled with other radiation sensors. Humans bear >all kinds of color misperceptions and generally agreed in practice on what >they see, except perhaps for Purple and Violet. >
Actually, there are a number of cultures that merge blue and green into one color catagory. As far as I know, though, (with the exception of red/purple) no one lumps two discrete hues, while seperating out those inbetween them.