Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So this is something I have been pondering for a while, but wouldn't know how to prove one way or the other.


Do you think it's possible to manufacture a colour that doesn't exist in nature?


I used to think yes, but now I suspect no and don't know how to come to a satisfactory (though inevitably not definitive) conclusion.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/6478-dulux-versus-gaia/
Share on other sites

Hmmm well I once read about some scientists in Teddington had created the world's blackest black. It is essentially the absence of light and useful for certain scientific processes. As far as I'm aware it does not occur naturally due to the existence of light throughout the natural world.


I'm on my iPhone at the mo so can't link or hunt for the source of this but maybe someone else could.

Not a scientist but ...... here goes.


1. All colour is a function of light.


2. Light can be refracted to create a spectrum of colours


3. That spectrum of colours provides every combination of colour that can ever be created - tho' some may not be present in any other form than the spectrum of light.


4. So YES nature got there first.


Doesn't the New Scientist have a question and answer column that could answer this?

Well I thought this about light and the spectrum of colours, but then you get into metallics and fluorescents, and they don't exist in the spectrum, I don't think, do they? Maybe they do. Or maybe they're not officially colours.


MM, you're quite right about New Scientist - I should have thought of it before (although to be fair, while I have been contemplating this for a while, it's never been with any real ferocity). I shall send them a missive toot sweet.

Bellenden Belle Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I found a link about Teddington's blackest black

>

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2732487.stm


This isn't black it's very very very very very very very very very very very dark blue.

It wouldn't do for priest's socks.

RosieH Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Do you think it's possible to manufacture a colour

> that doesn't exist in nature?


Can natural processes produce all possible colours?


Colour corresponds to electromagnetic wavelength. The electromagnetic spectrum is (believed to be) continuous therefore resolves to an infinite range of pure colours.


Electromagnetic radiation is (usually) produced in steps corresponding to the energy transition levels of certain types of sub-atomic particles (leptons). It could be argued that only a finite number of steps are possible. In which case, nature could not produce all possible pure colours.


However, in an expanding universe, the Doppler effect can bridge the gaps between any finite steps. Synchrotron radiation produces a similar effect. Therefore, our universe (according to our best understanding) is capable of generating a continuous electromagnetic spectrum of infinite resolution or, in plain English, an infinite range of pure colours.


Whether all the possible pure colours exist, or have existed, or will come to exist, can only be determined probabilistically, I would suggest.


> I used to think yes, but now I suspect no and

> don't know how to come to a satisfactory (though

> inevitably not definitive) conclusion.


As for mixtures of pure colours ? the probabilities are mind numbing. The number of pure colour mixtures exceeds the number of atoms in the observable universe by a very wide margin. I?ll leave you to decide whether you were/are right or wrong :)

[???? quote=I think *Bob* and CharlieCharlie are your actual Forum experts on colour

]



Well Rosie, it all depends on what you mean by 'exist in nature'... if you mean 'as seen by the human eye', then yes, manufacturers can match it, they now have highly complex scanners and software systems that can detect and copy micro variations in colour difference.


If you mean 'as found in the natural world' (and again the definition of 'natural' is complex) ie plants, minerals, fauna, the elements etc. then it becomes more tricky... synthetic or chemical dyes and pigments can create 'unnatural' colours, ie day-go, fluorescent and what we call 'flip' in the trade, ie colours that appear to be totally different depending on the angle you view them from. The colour industry has invented all sort of 'special effect colours' which can not be found in the natural world, but can, however, be recognised by the human eye. For example, you could have a fluorescent, flip, metallic gloss...


Then there is the thermochromic group which change colour depending on temperature, so are not constant. And to top it all, the metameric impact on colour (ie the fact that two colour samples on different sub-straights, may appear to be identical in one light source, but appear not to match at all in another type of light), makes defining and matching a colour problematic.

RosieH Wrote:

>

> Do you think it's possible to manufacture a colour

> that doesn't exist in nature?

>


I haven't a clue but this Synthetic chemical turns out to mimic molecule in body, causing unwanted death (the latter bit being my laywoman's interpretation) seems to tell us that we should adopt a little more caution before having fun with man-made chemicals and gaily adding them to everyday substances. Whether as colour or scent.


Should you choose to click and read the article - Chemical Xenobiotics and Mitochondrial Autoantigens in Primary Biliary Cirrhosis: Identification of Antibodies against a Common Environmental, Cosmetic, and Food Additive, 2-Octynoic Acid 1 - you will see that some fairly sensible researchers believe this 2-Octynoic Acid, invented to give a lovely lemony=limey scent and added with merry disregard for human life to all kinds of stuff that we slap onto or into our bodies, turns out to mimic a molecule that already existed in nature - in the cells on the lining of our bile ducts (bile - lemony/limey colour). Unfortunately this has a tendency to confuse the immune system which sadly in the course of getting rid of the synthetic chemical, destroys the bile ducts as well, causing a truly life ruining illness followed by death - faster or slower. I couldn't give you a definite vote for the slow death over the fast one. Either way, it cannot be described as a bundle of fun.


Don't know about Dulux v Gaia specifically, but in chemical manufacturers v human race, I have known a number of losers.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of Smoke Control law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, AFAICS, the "civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300" were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all per se, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...