The Existence of Blue

The Existence of Blue: Light and the Perception of Reality

If you ask any person to define "reality" you will probably receive similar responses. What's real is not generally questioned. Reality is "just the way things are". It's what's "possible" versus what's "impossible".

Science defines reality in measurable rules, which, solid as they seem, remain under the term "theory" for a reason. Philosophy defines reality more loosely, but generally groups it under the equally ambiguous term of "truth".

So why is reality, the supposedly solid underpinning of our existence, so difficult to precisely define? It comes down to the nature of perception. One major element of human perception is vision. Vision is dependent on light. Light, being both particle and wave, is complex in and of itself, and when we capture that light, bend it, shape it, and interpret it, we can only add to that complexity.

Consider the following. If you ask an individual the color of the sky on a clear day, they will tell you "blue". But if you ask the same person, "What is blue?" you will get a variety of responses, (if you get more than a quizzical look). Some will give you a social answer like, "blue is the color for boys". Others may give you an emotional reaction like, "blue is peaceful". Both answers are real for that individual, though they hardly form a complete definition of blue.

Scientifically, blue is, as all colors are, derived from the spectral division of light as it is received and interpreted by light receptors in the eye. Blue is blue because, in the case of the sky, a blue jay feather, or a bright blue plastic toy, certain parts of the light spectrum are being reflected, while others are being absorbed. Science can define blue in terms of wavelength, frequency, and energy.

But does the measurability of blue really point to its existence? Is blue real before it enters your eye? And does blue represent the same reality for everyone? Ask two people whether a teal object is blue or green and you will find that everyone draws their own parameters.

Or perhaps it is not a matter of deciding what is blue, but is an actual difference in perceiving blue. The fact that some people are color blind, that they are unable to distinguish certain colors at all, seems to point to the possibility that there may be subtle variances in the way each set of eyes actually receives blue even before we interpret its relevance.

So is blue "real"? If anything is, yes. For all "reality" is based on this interweaving of the measurable and immeasurable. In the end, what one sees, hears, tastes, smells, feels, thinks, perceives, interprets, and experiences is what is real for that person. But if something as seemingly simple as the color blue is so dependent on individual perception, how can we, as part of a human community, understand reality beyond our own?

The perception of color is actually a very good analogy. Just as the reality of blue is formed by what segments of light are reflected and absorbed, the reality of a society is formed when "light" from individuals is either reflected (accepted) or absorbed (ignored or rejected). This can be a wonderful or dangerous melding, but as long as there are new sources of "light", it will be a reality that is always in flux.