• Re: Pink is still not a physical colour

    From Richard Damon@[email protected] to comp.theory on Sun Nov 2 14:10:29 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 11/1/25 1:02 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    Pink is still not a physical colour; there are no pink photons.

    /Flibble



    But physical color isn't about single photon.

    Even your source points out that the usage you want to claim is a
    special case non-normal usage.

    All you are doing is showing how stupid you are.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Mr Flibble@[email protected] to comp.theory on Sun Nov 2 20:47:11 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 14:10:29 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:

    On 11/1/25 1:02 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    Pink is still not a physical colour; there are no pink photons.

    /Flibble



    But physical color isn't about single photon.

    Even your source points out that the usage you want to claim is a
    special case non-normal usage.

    All you are doing is showing how stupid you are.

    No, you are stupid, ignorant of the science. There are no pink photons.

    /Flibble
    --
    meet ever shorter deadlines, known as "beat the clock"
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Chris M. Thomasson@[email protected] to comp.theory on Sun Nov 2 12:58:59 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 11/1/2025 1:16 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sat, 01 Nov 2025 11:59:31 -0700, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/1/2025 10:02 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    Pink is still not a physical colour; there are no pink photons.

    Are there any rgb(0, 0, 0) photons?

    Black is also not a physical colour.

    Well, what about a photon at rgb(1, 1, 1) for float, rgb(255, 255, 255)
    for 8 bit color channels. Is that the all color? ;^) From which all
    other colors can be realized or measures, defined, named? Pink as pink.
    Think if Cat was spelled Dog? ;^)

    What about a white photon passing through a medium that alters its
    "color" when it reaches a sensor ready to try to measure it?
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Mr Flibble@[email protected] to comp.theory on Sun Nov 2 21:29:58 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 12:58:59 -0800, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/1/2025 1:16 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sat, 01 Nov 2025 11:59:31 -0700, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/1/2025 10:02 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    Pink is still not a physical colour; there are no pink photons.

    Are there any rgb(0, 0, 0) photons?

    Black is also not a physical colour.

    Well, what about a photon at rgb(1, 1, 1) for float, rgb(255, 255, 255)
    for 8 bit color channels. Is that the all color? ;^) From which all
    other colors can be realized or measures, defined, named? Pink as pink.
    Think if Cat was spelled Dog? ;^)

    What about a white photon passing through a medium that alters its
    "color" when it reaches a sensor ready to try to measure it?

    There are no white photons -- white isn't a physical colour either.

    /Flibble
    --
    meet ever shorter deadlines, known as "beat the clock"
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Chris M. Thomasson@[email protected] to comp.theory on Sun Nov 2 13:38:56 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 11/2/2025 1:29 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 12:58:59 -0800, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/1/2025 1:16 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sat, 01 Nov 2025 11:59:31 -0700, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/1/2025 10:02 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    Pink is still not a physical colour; there are no pink photons.

    Are there any rgb(0, 0, 0) photons?

    Black is also not a physical colour.

    Well, what about a photon at rgb(1, 1, 1) for float, rgb(255, 255, 255)
    for 8 bit color channels. Is that the all color? ;^) From which all
    other colors can be realized or measures, defined, named? Pink as pink.
    Think if Cat was spelled Dog? ;^)

    What about a white photon passing through a medium that alters its
    "color" when it reaches a sensor ready to try to measure it?

    There are no white photons -- white isn't a physical colour either.

    Shit, what about rgb(.5, .5, .5)?
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Mr Flibble@[email protected] to comp.theory on Sun Nov 2 21:55:24 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 13:38:56 -0800, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/2/2025 1:29 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 12:58:59 -0800, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/1/2025 1:16 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sat, 01 Nov 2025 11:59:31 -0700, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/1/2025 10:02 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    Pink is still not a physical colour; there are no pink photons.

    Are there any rgb(0, 0, 0) photons?

    Black is also not a physical colour.

    Well, what about a photon at rgb(1, 1, 1) for float, rgb(255, 255,
    255)
    for 8 bit color channels. Is that the all color? ;^) From which all
    other colors can be realized or measures, defined, named? Pink as
    pink.
    Think if Cat was spelled Dog? ;^)

    What about a white photon passing through a medium that alters its
    "color" when it reaches a sensor ready to try to measure it?

    There are no white photons -- white isn't a physical colour either.

    Shit, what about rgb(.5, .5, .5)?

    There are red, green and blue photons, but no grey photons.

    /Flibble
    --
    meet ever shorter deadlines, known as "beat the clock"
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Chris M. Thomasson@[email protected] to comp.theory on Sun Nov 2 14:04:10 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 11/2/2025 1:55 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 13:38:56 -0800, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/2/2025 1:29 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 12:58:59 -0800, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/1/2025 1:16 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sat, 01 Nov 2025 11:59:31 -0700, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/1/2025 10:02 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    Pink is still not a physical colour; there are no pink photons.

    Are there any rgb(0, 0, 0) photons?

    Black is also not a physical colour.

    Well, what about a photon at rgb(1, 1, 1) for float, rgb(255, 255,
    255)
    for 8 bit color channels. Is that the all color? ;^) From which all
    other colors can be realized or measures, defined, named? Pink as
    pink.
    Think if Cat was spelled Dog? ;^)

    What about a white photon passing through a medium that alters its
    "color" when it reaches a sensor ready to try to measure it?

    There are no white photons -- white isn't a physical colour either.

    Shit, what about rgb(.5, .5, .5)?

    There are red, green and blue photons, but no grey photons.

    When rgb(1, 0, 0), rgb(0, 1, 0) and rgb(0, 0, 1) photons are hitting a
    sensor at once, can it look white?
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Kaz Kylheku@[email protected] to comp.theory on Sun Nov 2 22:24:21 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 2025-11-02, Mr Flibble <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 14:10:29 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:

    On 11/1/25 1:02 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    Pink is still not a physical colour; there are no pink photons.

    /Flibble



    But physical color isn't about single photon.

    Even your source points out that the usage you want to claim is a
    special case non-normal usage.

    All you are doing is showing how stupid you are.

    No, you are stupid, ignorant of the science. There are no pink photons.

    There are also no water molecules that can indiviudally be at 100°C
    therefore boiling is not a physical phenomenon.
    --
    TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
    Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
    Mastodon: @[email protected]
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richard Heathfield@[email protected] to comp.theory on Mon Nov 3 00:24:43 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 02/11/2025 22:24, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
    On 2025-11-02, Mr Flibble <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 14:10:29 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:

    On 11/1/25 1:02 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:

    <snip>

    But physical color isn't about single photon.

    Even your source points out that the usage you want to claim is a
    special case non-normal usage.

    All you are doing is showing how stupid you are.

    No, you are stupid, ignorant of the science. There are no pink photons.

    There are also no water molecules that can indiviudally be at 100°C therefore boiling is not a physical phenomenon.

    And therefore a watched pot never boils.
    --
    Richard Heathfield
    Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
    "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
    Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Chris M. Thomasson@[email protected] to comp.theory on Sun Nov 2 17:35:51 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 11/2/2025 4:24 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
    On 02/11/2025 22:24, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
    On 2025-11-02, Mr Flibble <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 14:10:29 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:

    On 11/1/25 1:02 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:

    <snip>

    But physical color isn't about single photon.

    Even your source points out that the usage you want to claim is a
    special case non-normal usage.

    All you are doing is showing how stupid you are.

    No, you are stupid, ignorant of the science.  There are no pink photons. >>
    There are also no water molecules that can indiviudally be at 100°C
    therefore boiling is not a physical phenomenon.

    And therefore a watched pot never boils.


    :^D

    (Family Guy - Boiling Pot)
    https://youtu.be/HbJeK4R85nU

    ROFL!
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From dart200@[email protected] to comp.theory on Sun Nov 2 19:33:39 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 11/1/25 1:16 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sat, 01 Nov 2025 11:59:31 -0700, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/1/2025 10:02 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    Pink is still not a physical colour; there are no pink photons.

    Are there any rgb(0, 0, 0) photons?

    Black is also not a physical colour.

    /Flibble




    we don't know what qualia is so we don't know if the experience of pink
    is physical or not
    --
    a burnt out swe investigating into why our tooling doesn't involve
    basic semantic proofs like halting analysis

    please excuse my pseudo-pyscript,

    ~ nick
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richard Damon@[email protected] to comp.theory on Sun Nov 2 23:39:54 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 11/2/25 4:55 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 13:38:56 -0800, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/2/2025 1:29 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 12:58:59 -0800, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/1/2025 1:16 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sat, 01 Nov 2025 11:59:31 -0700, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/1/2025 10:02 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    Pink is still not a physical colour; there are no pink photons.

    Are there any rgb(0, 0, 0) photons?

    Black is also not a physical colour.

    Well, what about a photon at rgb(1, 1, 1) for float, rgb(255, 255,
    255)
    for 8 bit color channels. Is that the all color? ;^) From which all
    other colors can be realized or measures, defined, named? Pink as
    pink.
    Think if Cat was spelled Dog? ;^)

    What about a white photon passing through a medium that alters its
    "color" when it reaches a sensor ready to try to measure it?

    There are no white photons -- white isn't a physical colour either.

    Shit, what about rgb(.5, .5, .5)?

    There are red, green and blue photons, but no grey photons.

    /Flibble




    No, there are not. As "Color" is a property of perception. Photons have
    a specific frequency, to which for many of them, we perceive a specific
    color, but even then, different people might perceive the colors
    diffferently.

    Your problem is you are stuck on an fringe, not-widely accepted, attempt
    to define color.

    Note, there are "colors" that can't be made by light as has been shown
    by direct excitation of the light receptors in the eyes.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richard Damon@[email protected] to comp.theory on Sun Nov 2 23:41:36 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 11/2/25 3:47 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 14:10:29 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:

    On 11/1/25 1:02 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    Pink is still not a physical colour; there are no pink photons.

    /Flibble



    But physical color isn't about single photon.

    Even your source points out that the usage you want to claim is a
    special case non-normal usage.

    All you are doing is showing how stupid you are.

    No, you are stupid, ignorant of the science. There are no pink photons.

    /Flibble




    But that doesn't make pink not a color, as color isn't just about frequency.

    You are just stuck on an article that used a poor choice of words in
    their explanation, and even they put it in a context to show that this
    meaning wasn't what was normally accepted.

    You need to admit that you are just stuck trying to define a misuse of
    words.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richard Damon@[email protected] to comp.theory on Sun Nov 2 23:45:53 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 11/2/25 5:24 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
    On 2025-11-02, Mr Flibble <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 14:10:29 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:

    On 11/1/25 1:02 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    Pink is still not a physical colour; there are no pink photons.

    /Flibble



    But physical color isn't about single photon.

    Even your source points out that the usage you want to claim is a
    special case non-normal usage.

    All you are doing is showing how stupid you are.

    No, you are stupid, ignorant of the science. There are no pink photons.

    There are also no water molecules that can indiviudally be at 100°C therefore boiling is not a physical phenomenon.


    Actually, the fact is that Water is not H2O, but a mixture of H2O, H3O,
    and OH units tied together into a mega structure.

    Also, Temperature isn't defined for single molecules, just like color
    isn't actually defined by a single photon.

    If you see just a single photon, it will appear to be either a very
    vibrant but dim Red, Green, or Blue, depending what color receptor it hit.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Chris M. Thomasson@[email protected] to comp.theory on Sun Nov 2 21:02:59 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 11/2/2025 8:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
    On 11/2/25 5:24 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
    On 2025-11-02, Mr Flibble <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 14:10:29 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:

    On 11/1/25 1:02 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    Pink is still not a physical colour; there are no pink photons.

    /Flibble



    But physical color isn't about single photon.

    Even your source points out that the usage you want to claim is a
    special case non-normal usage.

    All you are doing is showing how stupid you are.

    No, you are stupid, ignorant of the science.  There are no pink photons. >>
    There are also no water molecules that can indiviudally be at 100°C
    therefore boiling is not a physical phenomenon.


    Actually, the fact is that Water is not H2O,

    Can we extract oxygen and hydrogen from water? One of them should be
    around twice as much... lol. ;^) Right?

    (Who's Killing the Hydrogen Car? Bob Lazar converted his Corvette to run
    on Hydrogen)

    https://youtu.be/Ytg23mDd1a4



    but a mixture of H2O, H3O,
    and OH units tied together into a mega structure.

    Also, Temperature isn't defined for single molecules, just like color
    isn't actually defined by a single photon.

    If you see just a single photon, it will appear to be either a very
    vibrant but dim Red, Green, or Blue, depending what color receptor it hit.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Mr Flibble@[email protected] to comp.theory on Mon Nov 3 17:34:12 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 23:39:54 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:

    On 11/2/25 4:55 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 13:38:56 -0800, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/2/2025 1:29 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 12:58:59 -0800, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/1/2025 1:16 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sat, 01 Nov 2025 11:59:31 -0700, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/1/2025 10:02 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    Pink is still not a physical colour; there are no pink photons. >>>>>>>
    Are there any rgb(0, 0, 0) photons?

    Black is also not a physical colour.

    Well, what about a photon at rgb(1, 1, 1) for float, rgb(255, 255,
    255)
    for 8 bit color channels. Is that the all color? ;^) From which all
    other colors can be realized or measures, defined, named? Pink as
    pink.
    Think if Cat was spelled Dog? ;^)

    What about a white photon passing through a medium that alters its
    "color" when it reaches a sensor ready to try to measure it?

    There are no white photons -- white isn't a physical colour either.

    Shit, what about rgb(.5, .5, .5)?

    There are red, green and blue photons, but no grey photons.

    /Flibble




    No, there are not. As "Color" is a property of perception. Photons have
    a specific frequency, to which for many of them, we perceive a specific color, but even then, different people might perceive the colors diffferently.

    Your problem is you are stuck on an fringe, not-widely accepted, attempt
    to define color.

    Note, there are "colors" that can't be made by light as has been shown
    by direct excitation of the light receptors in the eyes.

    As I said you are ignorant of the science and your ignorance seems to be fractal in nature.

    /Flibble
    --
    meet ever shorter deadlines, known as "beat the clock"
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Mr Flibble@[email protected] to comp.theory on Mon Nov 3 17:38:43 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 21:02:59 -0800, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

    On 11/2/2025 8:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
    On 11/2/25 5:24 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
    On 2025-11-02, Mr Flibble <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 14:10:29 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:

    On 11/1/25 1:02 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    Pink is still not a physical colour; there are no pink photons.

    /Flibble



    But physical color isn't about single photon.

    Even your source points out that the usage you want to claim is a
    special case non-normal usage.

    All you are doing is showing how stupid you are.

    No, you are stupid, ignorant of the science.  There are no pink
    photons.

    There are also no water molecules that can indiviudally be at 100°C
    therefore boiling is not a physical phenomenon.


    Actually, the fact is that Water is not H2O,

    Can we extract oxygen and hydrogen from water? One of them should be
    around twice as much... lol. ;^) Right?

    Very easy for oxygen: it is usually dissolved in water solution which fish seem to like: extracting dissolved oxygen from water is a mechanical
    rather than chemical reaction.

    /Flibble
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2