How we see color - Colm Kelleher

View full lesson: ed.ted.com/less...
There are three types of color receptors in your eye: red, green and blue. But how do we see the amazing kaleidoscope of other colors that make up our world? Colm Kelleher explains how humans can see everything from auburn to aquamarine.
Talk by Colm Kelleher, animation by TED-Ed.

[@lbncstll7415]

i love that our eyes are seeing this and knowing that this is happening while we're watching this

[@basti4655]

Our eyes are only the light sensors and signal converters, the actual seeing happens in our brain.

[@evanthedragon3704]

​@@basti4655 yeah right man!

[@user-hp8rf4ze5k]

@@basti4655 fr! everything that we perceive as happening is just consistent hallucination lmao

[@pawamusic1301]

Cruise

[@greencat1849]

@@basti4655 well reeeeeally, the processing takes place in the eye

[@dargon1084]

First I always think the natural world is beautiful. But in a way, the act of us learning something is just as beautiful

[@laureleephillips8266]

It's one and the same as we are part of the 'natural world'. Yuval Noah Harari author of Sapiens A Brief History of Humankind, taught me this and much more.

[@dargon1084]

@@laureleephillips8266 one of the best books I've read, very sad in some parts too

[@Tamizushi]

While I knew all of these things, I always have a hard time explaining and you guys are doing an awesome job at it. I think from now on everything I speak to someone about colours the eyes I'm just gonna show them this video instead. Keep up the good work!! :)

[@Jcarr250]

RGB is an additive color system, where the colors combine together at the same time. Red blue and yellow form the basis of a subtractive color system. Each dye works by absorbing colors, but reflecting a certain frequency well in order to give it its color. When you combine them, the two dyes each absorb some of each others frequencies, which causes them to reduce the strength of the two. The primary colors in each are really determined by several things and I don't have room here for it.

[@NovaRuner]

this fascinating! but then I started to wonder... what if someone genetically engineered a people with retina cone cells for other light waves? like ultraviolet or radio waves. would those guys think the rest of us color blind? and how might their perception of color be different from ours? Makes you think doesn't it?

[@user-em4rk4qo1f]

+Nathan Ricard Would be fantastic if that was possible

[@workhardt2]

Well light is just energy that is being transferred. The difference between different electromagnectic waves ( ultraviolet waves, radio waves, light) is simply their wave lenght. Color, is an illusion. Our eyes our merely sensers, the energy transferred with wave lengths of ( 400 cm to 700 cm ) is called light..

[@candyuniverse404]

Actually there's animals like butterflies who can see at least double the colors we can, they have six of those color sensors so they can mix up more color combinations we can only imagine.

[@rob-profoundlydapper1619]

There is a condition(forgot what it was called) that causes a person to have 4 cones in their eyes (only present in women and quite rare), the world perceived by them is full of more colours than the average person can determine.

[@naveenrajan537]

Nathan Ricard those kind of peole alrady exist..it's most like you say..they ate tetra chromatic... They can see four colours... just evolution...

[@irasanchez1265]

I like hearing voice artists with a variety of accents. Addison is good, but I'm happy to hear the diversity of others.

[@pulpfictionost]

lol, Its an Irish accent. He sounds so happy. :D

[@brook0000]

jacksepticye.

[@w3jd4n]

he sounds happytalking about rainbows, get it? patrick’s day

[@numex106]

seeing this makes me want to protect my eyes more

[@beanman4342]

7 years later

[@mayasudac6232]

@@beanman4342 1 month later

[@buggax7967]

@@mayasudac6232 1 week later

[@mayasudac6232]

@@buggax7967 2 hours later

[@sigmaswan2969]

Yeah

[@happilyevernever4289]

0:35 how is color a physical property of light? Color only happens in the mind. And our perceptions may differ to others with how we perceive it in our mind. We cannot prove that everyone's perception of yellow is the same coz of how it is perceived in the brain.

[@asmitapaul_]

Ted-Ed videos r equal to ASMR videos for mee,so relaxing ...😌 (additional benefit: no wastage of any products and u get to know about something in detail)

[@Kaiju_Tea_Party]

Yes, but not exactly. Color is just a frequency of light and isn't color until it is perceived as color by our brain. Because we perceive the monitor as yellow, it is yellow, even if there is no yellow light. However, there may be yellow light for some of us because there is a series of TVs that have added a fourth color to the tv screens; a yellow one. If someone is using that TV as a monitor, then yes, the Yellow is Yellow.

[@Tupster]

A nice, concise, and simple explanation of a complex topic.

[@indebtanup]

Wouldn't noise cancellation require both waves to have the same frequency? So that, like you said, the opposite amplitudes coincide. This gets me thinking though: If waves of diff frequencies superpose, then shouldn't we always just see one resultant wave? Rather than seeing discrete colors and objects, shouldn't we just see one "final" wave as given by the superposition formula?

[@nontrainspotter]

Yea, you made my point clearer and more concise than I did, hadn't thought about the "cross wiring" with other sensations of which there are many examples now I think about it!

[@Daph909]

Wow, I'm used to working with RGB stuff in photoshop and video editing software, but I honestly never knew why these three colours are so important. Thank you so much for clearing that up, it totally makes sense to me now!:)

[@Alphathon]

What makes it even sillier is that the video that is being displayed is encoded in terms of R, G and B, so any yellow that is displayed is merely reconstructed from the existing RGB source, which is what our eyes would do anyway.

[@mattt6459]

Light does not travel in waves you guys, it travels in a spiral like a spring, it looks like a wave yes, so does a spring from the side. The bounce, or speed that the spring is travel depicts the color we see. This alone proves einsteins E=mc2 to be totally wrong. The very fact that we see color dismisses that light travels at a constant speed (C). We have seen this by crushing LIGHT from a laser through a Venturi. Not by smashing protons together in a collider. We went to the source.

[@sofiya2319]

Animations are WOW really playing a big role in understanding and learning. 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

[@nickromo8195]

Wow isn't an adjective

[@DisGuyPlayz]

@@nickromo8195 so you really care about that?

[@taalatchouf5427]

This is one of the most fascinating video I've ever seen. Proves how little I know. Thanks!

[@respectableaf9061]

Goldfish actually have a yellow cone in their eye, they could tell us what yellow really looks like, but we don't speak goldfish.🐠

[@taleahbailey9667]

Ahhh, the 'no signal' tv screen with that specific array of colours... It all makes sense haha!

[@priyapanicker1825]

Did anybody notice the color wheel shown in this video at 0:46 is wrong. Blue, red and yellow are the primary colors. They have green in place of yellow.

[@itry7451]

No , green is a primary colour (to be precise additive primary colour)you're confused with the colour wheel of pigment. In painting or arts, we consider yellow a primary colour ( subtractive primary colours)

[@SSJ5Goton]

the frequency of light waves don't have colors - they are just frequencies. It is only when they stimulate the cones in our retina that we "see" color.

[@josephcoon5809]

0:30 it is absolutely wrong. “Colors” are a perception, not a physical phenomenon. Any machine designed to detect electromagnetic radiation measures wavelength, not color. 1:15 Perception does not occur in the retina. All the retina does is detect light and send a signal to the visual cortex. The visual cortex translates those signals and transmits a summary to the prefrontal cortex where you finally PERCEIVE color. 2:45 Colors are what the prefrontal cortex perceives. Wavelengths are what the retina interacts with. Colors do not exist. Wavelengths of light do.

[@Ergo_Deleted]

Lol was exactly thinking this!

[@marcussorensen3849]

take it easy man, its a 3 minute video explaining something that took neuroscientists decades to figure out. No need to get caught up in nitpicking word choice

[@josephcoon5809]

@Princesse De l'Irréel Cut a brain open, and pull out “color.” Color is a symbolic language, and, like all languages, it is not a physical object. Colors exist within the mind, and the mind (metaphysical) is distinct from the brain (physical).

[@itsokay5608]

So why do we need to see color? What advantage does an animal who can see color have over the other?

[@akhileshsajeev4240]

Beautifully and lucidly explained 👌

[@kendallangel8960]

Color is property of the object. Color is produced by the absorption of selected wavelengths of light by an object. Objects can be thought of as absorbing all colors except the colors of THEIR APPEARANCE which are reflected (that's why color is property of the object). A blue object illuminated by white light absorbs most of the wavelengths except those corresponding to blue light. These blue wavelengths are reflected by the object.

[@TheDummbob]

+Kendall Angel Hey, did you just copy/paste BasharCommunications's comment when "attaking" my other comment? (Also by this logic, the property of the object would be wavelenght of el.magn. waves, not color)

[@TheDummbob]

There may not be evidence that the brain creates color, but there ain't no evidence that light is color either. No, you get it wrong, YOU confuse perception with reality. I'm repeating myself, but you guys just don't seem to get it. Look what i'm saying is this: The physical property called light, actually doesn't look like it looks to us. Its only colored when sensed and translated by a certain biochemical algorithm. It gets translated into color, but in and of itself (eg. it's objective "look") it is not colored. I'm nit saying that light doesn't exist or anything like that, just saying that it doesn't look like anything outside of brains capable of processing light. This doesn't mean that it can't be sensed: It still has energy, it still can interact with matter, therefore it still can be sensed by other organisms without a brain to "produce" the color. All you need in order to explain that, is that electro magnetic waves do exist beyond our perception, and they do interact with other objects beyond our perception. Color is not needed to explain any of these phenomenon YOU guys say, that what you percieve (color) is actually the same thing as the objective physical property that is being observed. therefore YOU confuse perception with reality, because YOU say that you can see the objective qualities of light. I'm saying that i can't see the objective properties of light, because i think they can't be seen. Therefore i differentiate between what i can see and what is really physically there, outside of my brain. If that sounds like confusing perception with reality to you, then you're lost in the labyrinth of your own confused "reality".

[@DriverrRon]

Finally, It took me some time to find a show that understands why we really see light. I give props to Colm Kelleher's internet science show... I feel you should get the nobel-peace prize but maybe some day...

I would hire this guy just to say the word "cone"

[@tinkerbell_faye]

Thank you so much for your videos. I find them very helpful; I have an exam in perception and cognition, and your videos are extremely helpful! Thank you!

[@QuantumSong]

The "cancelling" only happens to waves of the same frequency and opposite phases (not amplitudes, amplitude is always positive by definition). So waves of the same or very close frequencies do "interact" with each other (scientifically speaking, they make an interference pattern), but waves of different frequencies propagate mostly independently from one another. See wikipedia page on Interference.

[@IgorDellaPietra]

if just blue waves shine on a red object, the red object absorbs the wave, as it also would with the green wave (objects just reflect theyre own color waves) so you would see - black.

[@gksalf10]

If the red and green christmas lights are overlapped and neither blocks each other(not realistic assumption), it will look like a piece of yellow lightsource. But you see a red light and a green light at [different locations]. Beams of light coming from different locations arrive at different points on retina, thus stimulating different cells of different points. Brain can interprete both color and "location"(or rather, "direction") of the light source, not only the color.

[@blindekillen]

My take on it is that all the different regions of the brain is used for interpretating different forms of signals. As these senses gets more and more complex with more and more ways of observing the physical world. Soundwaves, lightwaves and then representations to predict causal patterns of all these signals your brain has taken in. The conciousness grows out of these senses in combination to build a richer simulation of the oustide world. An observer is needed to get a full picture of it.

[@ampeyro]

magenta (or was it pink?) doesn't exist as a frequency on the EM spectrum, it's how our mind fills the gap to join the two ends of visible light, or what's left if you remove green, so in that case is always a mixture of blue and red

[@renouncer]

I LOVE THIS!!! TED ED ARE THE GOATS!!!

[@2442MTS]

The RGB-color system is used to describe light, while the RYB-color system is used to describe paint. If you mixed all colored light together you would get white, while if you mixed all colored paint together you would get black.

[@helmutalexanderrubiowilson6835]

flawless explanation of this in youtube

[@hoppopandaciddrop]

0:15 - 0:21 Вы наверное слышали, что свет, в некотором смысле, является волной и что цвет объекта зависит от частоты световой волны, которую он отражает. 0:22 - 0:29 Свет с высокой частотой электро-магнитного излучения видится нам фиолетовым, с низкой - красным, а промежуточная частота светового спектра видится нам желтой, зеленой, оранжевой и т.д.

[@Kibari2600]

Thank you! I was about to tell Smith something myself but then I saw your comment. You actually said more than what I was about to x)

[@hoppopandaciddrop]

Yeah, I think I'll continue to make subs for videos. It'd be great to translate it in voice and posting as a video response. I'm working on it...

[@KapilMidha]

good video, nicely and concisely explains certain aspects of colour vision in humans.

[@Satchboy71]

They can calculate how much yellow is needed by the varying levels of the RGB signal and produce a truer yellow instead of a mix of Red and Green.

[@malcolmbryant]

You disagree with the statement that "two different frequencies shouldn't interact at all" yet give as a counterexample the case when "two waves of opposite amplitude coincide" to produce noise cancellation. Opposite amplitude yes, but they need to be of the SAME FREQUENCY for it to work. The man in the video is wholly correct.

[@habeebasultana7593]

The composition of these 3 receptors make us perceive colors and that's why the red color you see isn't actually the same red color some other guy sees because you both don't have the exact number of photoreceptors. Job well done Ted👍 Widened our perspective BTW are you really TED the man with the golden voice who was found homeless before his talent's recognition

[@taiham25]

I know this comment is from 2 years ago, but having more receptors then someone else doesn’t mean you see a completely different color, we all have the same type of cones (short, medium, long) having more of let’s say long cones can help you differentiate between long wavelengths, so if you have more long cones you can see more shades of red than the average person, not see a completely different color.

[@spurthichadharam9144]

Thank you for giving this opportunity, I think an object gets its color as it accepts that quantum of energy..for example red color is obtained as the object is at that energy quantum in its natural state..

[@TheBelmontClan]

Thats a very good point of spectrum processing. The thresh hold between the subreality in which reality is born from. Color blocks being separated in a play pen is much different than four color theorm. Its the complexities associated with human emotion based on colors and unresolved historical grivences that have effect all down to the simple level of color processing. Colors have history already pre-wired into them before life is even born.

[@KuZiMeiChuan]

How is it that we perceive at all? Where is the specific mechanism in the brain that is experiencing all of this? I know it's in the occipital lobe, we can see the activity in fMRI scans, but it's hard to frame the question of what I'm asking exactly. If this world I see is a screen in a movie theater, then what is watching the movie? An atom? Chemical reactions? Electricity? What is consciousness made of? What is the core component of the brain that suffers its perceived reality?

[@bellpepper3166]

If we don’t see the waves physically, then how do we know that they are actually there? They could be strait lines, if we can’t see the waves and we just see the color. Another science question, how do we know that atoms exist if we can’t actually see them, not even through a microscope? We can see cells through that kind of microscope, but not atoms. How do we know that they exist?

[@informationparadox387]

Hey , Even By seeing something doesn't correspond to any of its real nature , Means our senses cannot give the precise nature of reality (i.e. they can be tricked!). By saying that There is atoms , wave, its totally based on mathematical theories & Experiments! & There is even more to say but it would be better if you find it!

[@anuja_ab]

We can see atoms through a scanning tunneling microscope (STM)

[@blindekillen]

The "observer" being the "consiousness". So the brain came first, and as it got more and more complex with more ways of interpreatating the world, a consiousness grew out of all the parts working in combination.

[@javierreyna5321]

Guillermo González Camarena was the mexican inventor that made the first color TV :) .

[@ma2i485]

nice

[@nathanshoemake3867]

I'm a little confused? Red, *Yellow, and Blue are primary colors in art. That is when painting, coloring, and so on. But, here the colors we see are a mixture of Red, *Green, and Blue. After some research I have come to realize this is the truth, but why is it not Red, *Yellow, and Blue. After all, Yellow and Blue paints mixed creates different shades of Green... I've never thought of Red and Green as coming together and creating shades of Yellow?

[@ahmedelsawy7167]

there is an error at 2:15 it is not another way it is the same way

[@Mayur_Mousam_Baruah]

How is it the same way? Pure yellow signals cannot be detected directly by cones, so an 'approximate' is made by both red and green cone, but when pure red and green signals are present together, again both red and green cone detect but it is not approximated to intentionally mean yellow in this case, still we see yellow, as the approximation is done by brain not by the cones.

[@Love1War]

The yellow is actually just red and green pixels close to eachother to activate both of the cones at once.

[@avavav1232]

if you zoom in to your screen using a magnifying glass, you will notice that each pixel is built out of 3 sub-pixels which are green, blue, and red.

[@yagrumal]

Loved it. But there is a mistake in the Spanish translation. At 2:43, "rod" is translated as "red".

[@dcxdawn7541]

this little film is exceptional!

[@yulibby6267]

I’m watching this for school as a quiz for the teacher but every time I’m submitted to the teacher it returns as Missing

[@nigelmckee3058]

well the very fact that it's a 'red' object tells you it's going to absorb everything but red, but that's out of white light, blue light is a relatively small portion of that light - shining a pure blue light on something red would likely make it red, with a blue tinge.

[@giuseppeturco7377]

I simply think that there are some phenomena wich can be both perceived and phisically described, and others that can only be perceived or only be described phisically. And, of course, that experiencing something is completely different than just understand it theoretically, but this doesn't mean that a theoretical description could not correspond to or explain perceivable phenomena (for example we don't directly perceive the velocity of gas particles in the air, but we do perceive temperature, which theoretically depends on this average velocity). There would be much more to discuss and think about

[@SubMeForNothing]

red has the lowest frequency wave, blue is the highest frequency wave we can see, yet when their together we see purple which is even higher than blue? I also know that pink is not part of the color spectrum?

[@hoppopandaciddrop]

1:13 - 1:17 И все же, как это область, в которой смешаны красный и зеленый, видится нам желтой? 1:18 - 1:21 Чтобы это понять, необходимо знание биологии. 1:22 - 1:24 В частности то, каким образом человек видит цвет. 1:25 - 1:30 Восприятие цвета происходит на уровне слоя клеток, размером с толщину бумажного листа; на так называемой сетчатке, которыая покрывает внутренней часть глаза. 1:31 - 1:37 Сетчатка состоит из двух типов фоторецепторных клеток: палочки и колбочки.

[@MushroomKing30]

The rods and cones should be pointing outwards instead of inwards, with regards to the center of the eyeball

[@LtStJebus]

This is why the RGBY tvs seem silly to me. Red green and blue can create every colour we can see, and adding yellow light won't improve the range of colours or the quality. The only thing it does is increase the vibrancy of yellow, but the same thing can be achieved by modifying colour balance on the TV settings or the video itself.

[@alberthaust4542]

In the diagram, why is light shown moving through portions of the eye other than the pupil? Also, going by how physicists sometimes speak, light waves are bigger than the waves shown in this diagram.

[@TheBelmontClan]

Hmm, so when the brain is wiring or unwiring its emotional response to color mechanism, is it plugging in or unplugging through the segregative process? Why such powerful emotions associated with color? Reasoning of rational through likes or dislikes of colors whether be it trauma, pleasure, recollective recall etc. Unknown perception to known perception or vice versa?

[@gamefreak2456]

seeing that rainbow at 3:00 just made me think of jackass lol.

[@Cytowic]

This lesson is profoundly mistaken. "There are no colors in the wavelengths," as Newton himself said. Color exists in the brain. If color were dependent on wavelength, then the color of objects would change constantly given that illumination changes moment to moment. The Young-Helmholz theory that Kelleher erroneously promotes cannot explaikn either color constancy or color shadows, two fundamental problems in vision science that have produced shelves of book. But "An object is red because it reflects more red wavelengths" is soo off base that it isn't even wrong.

[@rockanderson1823]

We understand that objects can change color based on illumination. If I shine a white light on an object, I get a color. If I shine a red light on an object, I can get a different color. A green laser emits 532nm wavelength electromagnetic radiation. But, if I was talking about color, I might say it has a green frequency even though we both know it's 532nm frequency electromagnetic radiation. The color we perceive is dependent upon the frequencies of light striking our cones and our brains perception of these signals. Remember the old saw.."if a tree fell and no one was there to hear it, did it make a sound?" Perhaps a better question would be.."is there color without a brain to perceive it? In other words, color is not a fundamental character of an object as it only exists when we look upon it. Newton was right.

[@Cytowic]

Rock Anderson You describe the age-old problems of color constancy and colored shadows. But you are mistaken that a certain wavelength of light will be "green." I refer to Edwin Land's Retinex theory. Human color vision is not wavelength-dependent, as many clinical studies have shown. If it were, then the colors of objects would change moment to moment as the illumination varied. Some patients with V4 lesions do in fact have remaining color vision that IS wavelength-dependent. And they show marked abnormalaties in color perception as expected.

[@peterturner345]

Richard E. Cytowic lol well what does that do for me rich? Isn't every single thing in life held to this standard then? because everything in life is perceived thru the brain? When science starts to lean towards philosophy, is usually when u realize "they" don't really know.

[@alkhemiaaugustine3764]

Rock Anderson was actually agreeing with you. It is said the wavelength is "green" as that is the corresponding color we perceive for the wavelength number however wavelengths don't have colour.

[@WormHole1000]

How about experimenting on your own to rediscover and confirm the BOOKS or FACTS are actually correct. Be the scientist and find out for sure instead debating on biased OPINIONS both you and Rock Anderson are arguing about.

[@bensonwu1238]

This is a good video that can help me do better in science.

[@gksalf10]

adjacent, not overlapped? Because we also see "shape". "Shape" is the collection of information about where each points of light sources are located. If your monitor displays blue on the right and red on the left, your brain knows that blue colors are at the right side and red at the left, so your brain doesn't just mix them up. On the other hand, if your whole monitor turns on both red and blue lightsources, we see it as full of purple color, because both come from same directions.

[@cry2love]

Still, you did not reply to the question 1 - How am I seeing yellow. If green light & red light are independent - HOW DO THEY MIX TO BECOME YELLOW?

[@leokac]

It does not become yellow, it's just human brain reads it as an average frequency, so we perceive as yellow.

[@qwertymnvcxz]

This guys voice is amazing.

[@hoppopandaciddrop]

0:30 - 0:39 Вы можете назвать это "физическим цветом", поскольку цвет является физическим свойством самого света и вовсе не зависит от человеческого восприятия. 0:40 - 0:43 На самом деле, это всего лишь часть истории про цвет. 0:44 - 0:46 Например, вы могли видеть эту картинку раньше. 0:47 - 0:51 Как видите, область между красным и зеленым является желтой.

[@HigherPlanes]

where it gets confusing to me is when talking about the quantum observer effect..that an observer changes the outcome of the thing being observed. Whether or not that's true, I don't know, you kind of have to take their word for it, but it's interesting. It has interesting implications on reality.

[@valtunacat]

thank you , i have been watching all yoour videos and i learn a lot more things then i do in school :)

[@DannyDMJM]

I always wondered what would happen if we only had the cone cells that correspond to red. Would we see in black and white, or black and red?

[@કુલદિપ-છ6લ]

Nice precious knowledge worth it watching it after 9yrs lol can't believe

[@ericlang7987]

Wow, this sounds really cool!

[@jaxci94]

He's definitely Irish, anyways I'm a big fan of these videos. I like that a 10 year old kid can watch these videos and understand the concepts. They're simple and concise.

[@kylejames5273]

His voice drives me crazy!

[@GordonGarvey]

Kyle Gailey He's Irish.

[@fireinthehole1986]

Gordon O'Gairbhith Probably Scottish or Canadian.

[@haeinpark5991]

The primary colors are magenta"red" , cyan "blue" and yellow ! We have in retina just three types of color of cons red erythrolabe , blue cyanolabe and green chlorolabe! And green isn't primary color! So how our visual system can produce the same colors in the environment while it doesn't have the primary colors pigmentation in the cons!

[@Kaiju_Tea_Party]

Unless the bionic eye codes the normally invisible light as if it was visible light, or as some other sensation. Visual information doesn't have to be given to the brain as visual information for the brain to be able to make use of it. The most obvious case of this is echolocation but there are some technologies which are attempting to give sight to the blind without giving them back their vision.

[@khanhnamphung836]

It's so helpful.Thank you,Ted.

[@GMLSX]

And you can prove it with a good camera or the color picker within a paint programm.

[@maakatea8]

Well done! I would have also mentioned a little bit of the opponent-process theory, though. Trichromatic theory is only half of the story, and it would be important to say that even if it makes it a bit more complicated.

[@davide7708]

Can you explain?

[@lahovaryophthalmologyteam]

You do not disagree with that. You quoted "frequencies", but retorted with "amplitudes". It is weird that the "pink" wave length does not exist, but the color does. Since color is just perception of our striate cortex, no color actually exists in a physical sense.

[@ManojKumar-si9zj]

Thanks for the knowledge bro😊 Loved your explanation 👏 👌

[@TYRONEL3TRAS]

You might have heard that light is a kind of wave And that the color of an object is related to the frequency of light waves it reflects

[@Tragono]

Yes there is. In this video, he said in his irish accent specifically that yellow light existed, just that we didn't directly detect it. Pink, on the other hand, does not actually exist. It's just everything that isn't green.

[@MrJayPuff]

Can you explain how this works with the opponent process theory of vision

[@heidi_jsamuel]

Amazing video ❤️

[@CGjamppl]

This video should be titled 'How We See Kelleher' by Colm Kelleher.

[@Killerkraft975]

Since our eyes only contains red,green,or blue cone cells, they can only recieve wavelengths of those ranges. For arguement sake, lets say there is a 'being' that can detect a wider range of wavelengths, they can percieve colours that we cannot visualise including RGB. There are some animals with UV or IR wavelength detection ranges but in our theoretical being, it can even see microwaves or Xrays as a colour (again that we cannot interpret), which is kind of crazy. Imagine seeing radio waves come off antennaes creating a specific colour and somehow that can communicate with other devices or seeing through literally everything from xrays.

[@hoppopandaciddrop]

0:52 - 0:58 Если подумать, то это довольно странно, потому что свет-это волна и две различные частоты вообще не должны взаимодействовать между собой. 0:59 - 1:02 Они должны просто сосуществовать подобно двум голосам, поющим в унисон. 1:03 - 1:10 Так, в этой желтой области представлены две волны светового излучения с различными частототами: одна имеет красный цвет, другая- зеленый. 1:11 - 1:12 Нет вообще никакого желтого цвета!

[@hottestbrain]

That one was made so it can reproduce a wider colour-spectrum. I personally think it's baloney, because the signal that is sent to your TV only has 3 colours, the fourth yellow one is nonexistent.

[@hoppopandaciddrop]

1:38 - 1:42 Палочки обеспечивают сумеречное зрение, и они бывают только одного вида. 1:43 - 1:50 Колбочки, в свою очередь,-бывают трех видов, которые примерно соответствуют трем цветам: красному, зеленому и синему. 1:51 - 1:56 Когда вы видите цвет, каждая отделная колбочка посылает свой электро-магнитный сигнал в мозг. 1:57 - 2:02 Предположим, что желтый свет, который является настоящим желтым светом с соответствующей частотой, светит внутрь глаза.

[@djdedan]

the color wheel in the vid is based on combining light, which combines differently than pigments/materials... why? because pigments REFLECT light..

[@rahatali365]

i really loved the way it explained

[@zodiacfml]

Lucky for digital camera makers.

[@bran_rx]

plot twist: tv manufacturers actually put the entire spectrum in TVs, but we just can't see em