Comment on is white light "white" because that's what our start emits?

Yareckt@lemmynsfw.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

It depends on if our cone cells which are responsible for colour reception would have evolved differently. With our current sun and atmosphere they have evolved to perceive a range of wavelengths that are the most abundant/intense and don’t have a drop in intensity in the middle. Here is a graph showing solar and terrestrial wavelength intensities compared to wavelengths we have evolved to see.

Image credit

So to find out if the range of wavelengths we are able to see would be different if our star were a red dwarf we would need to take the emission spectrum of the star you’d want to replace our star with(the orange part), then remove from that the percentages of each wavelength that our atmosphere absorbs to get the terrestrial wavelength intensities (the dark blue part). Then you could probaly look at that graph and take a chunk out of the Y-axis that covers the highest intensity wavelengths (cause plants would probably have that colour and we’d want to see those) while not getting too long and also trying to avoid lower intensity dips in wavelength. Then you’ve got your visible colour range. If that range is the same as our current one then white stays white. In general objects that appear to us as white reflect or emit a mix of waves with different wavelengths in such a way that we perceive the total of it as roughly equally blue, red and green. If the visible colour range we perceive is different, then our cone cells would also be triggered at different wavelengths.

source
Sort:hotnewtop