@davidbaron Your vision is not well-described as a 3-vector space.
1
@tabatkins Why not? Each of our 3 response curves is a vector in the ∞-dimensional vector space of possible response curves.
2
@davidbaron They're not independent, is why. They are ordered linearly, so the appearance of a loop is surprising.
1
@tabatkins Do you mean overlapping ranges (still independent) or that one response curve changes when another responds?
2
@davidbaron When using a single wavelength of light, there are colors you can't produce.
1
@davidbaron Some colors are impossible with any amount of light, but you can trick your eyes into seeing them (super green, for example).
1
@davidbaron The fact that spectral yellow and non-spectral yellow look the same isn't an accident, but purple vs red+blue *is*.
1
@tabatkins No, I don't buy that distinction. They're both the result of a 3-D space.
3
@davidbaron Or you're arguing at the wrong level of discussion, more abstract than the physical basis that I'm talking about.
2
@davidbaron Abstractly, purple is just a blue and red response, with low green response. But that's impossible to do with single light color
2
@tabatkins Sure, spectrum is 1-D and our vision is a 3-D subspace of an ∞-D space of functions from that 1-D space to reals.
Jul 28, 2014 · 7:11 PM UTC
1