More color nonsense

[Bob Norton]

Joshua T. opined:

>susanargus says:
>
>>A spectrum color is a color generated from the spreading of white
>>light into a continuum of wavelengths from shortest wavelength
>>to longest.
>>magenta does not have a single wavelength.

It has an entire range of wavelengths that can be called "magenta", just
like any other color. We don't have separate names for every single
wavelenghth on the spectrum. We assign names to ranges. The entire range
between indigo and ultraviolet is magenta. I haven't had the time to look
up the exact wavelength range of that region. Centered somewhere short of
400 nM. If you blend it it with a certain amount of white light, you get
the color that most will agree is mauve: a tint of indigo. I use "tint here
in its scientific definition. 
>
>This looks like a reason to "exclude" magenta (and mauve) from the
>spectrum, and I'm not sure Robert Norton presented one to include it,
>though he did say
>
>>>Every color the eye can detect is in the solar spectrum.

Only if you want to construct a fantasy world for yourself, totally bereft
of scientific knowledge.

>
>On the other hand, susanargus and Robert seem to agree that folks don't
>have magenta (or mauve) receptors, and perceiving it is a complex process.

You don't need magenta detectors in your retinas. Do you have yellow
detectors? No. Can you see a pure monochromatic yellow light like that of
ionized sodium under low pressure? Absolutely. You can also fool yourself
into thinking you're seeing yellow light by blending red and green light.
Cyan and magenta are no different. You don't have receptors with responses
centered on them, either.
>