Slobodan, I’m generally very open to reading your posts but whatever you’ve smoked or eaten recently is affecting you and in not a good way.
You came late into the thread with an admission of not understanding some posts about color...
My "admission" was sarcasm, Andrew, and you should know it by now if you read my posts regularly. I have enormous respect for science in general, and YOUR personal contribution to color science. I wasn't mocking either. What I was trying to point out, in a humorous (sarcastic) way, is that there is a time and place for complex scientific debates, and this forum and this particular thread, isn't.
This thread started by someone asking about The Nine Irrefutable Laws of Colors, and then the OP explained that it was a humorous
take on the world of color "before the ICC was formed and before the WWW (internet)." But humor and geeks do not mix well, apparently (other than geeks becoming a target for humor).
About my "absurd claim" (concerning "colors impossible to define") that "does not exist anywhere in the post":
... The weird thing about colors is that you can't really describe them in the end...
Then someone pointed out what painters [at least those "before the ICC was formed and before the WWW (internet)"] have known for millennia, i.e., about three primary colors (red, blue, yellow), and all those color wheels display as such to this day, and you guys shot him down with "there are no primary colors."
This is why I argue with you at al... you use scientific complexity to muddy the waters for what is obvious to common people in everyday use. You are trying to shatter commonly accepted conventions, which, however imprecise, have served its purpose for the vast majority of us quite well so far.
Yes, words and how we use them are often language and culture specific. We, common people, say "love" and geeks say "it is just neurons firing in the brain" (I am improvising here), thus impossible to define. And yet love exists, however difficult to define it is. The same goes for beauty. Or pornography. Or color for that matter. Yes, it is cultural, yes, it is subjective, yes, it is context-specific, yes, it is hard to define. Yet you know it when you see it (literally and figuratively).