RGB light doesn't make white ... apparently!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 апр 2023
- To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/DaveMcKeegan/
The first 200 of you will get 20% off Brilliant’s annual premium subscription
Thanks to @Planarwalk
PATREON: / davemckeegan
Please consider supporting the channel by making purchases through my Amazon affiliates: geni.us/Affiliate
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Music by Bensound.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This video was sponsored by Brilliant
#rgb #light #debunked 
Наука
To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/DaveMcKeegan/. The first 200 of you will get 20% off Brilliant’s annual premium subscription.
Why not take on a hard topic, disprove Dr R of Sky Scholar I dont think anyone can disprove him, he has proven that the CMB is a freaking joke it does not exist, Professor Dave pretended to make a video debunking him but really it wasnt a debunk I dont know what it was, it was childish at best. Dr R is the real deal he isnt some flat earth crack pot, he is insanely intelligent. It would behoove people to take what he is saying seriously. I challenge anyone that is going to take the subject seriously to watch Professor Dave's debunk of Dr R and then watch Dr R response and you tell me who won that little argument. Dr R made him look like a child.
Just keep getting an internal server error...
Great vid though!
Pete and PETER remind of NICK and FETCHER from Chicken Run...
DAVE! DAVE! DAVE! DAVE! Hi, check your email bud, I sent you a message but because computers seem to hate me my emails usually end up in people's SPAM folders. #LoveYouBye
9:15 - Actually, yellow surfaces COULD be reflecting red and green and absorbing yellow wavelengths. Most of the time this doesn't happen, but you would never know unless you used a prism to split the light to see what bands the surface is reflecting.
This is why lightbulb CRI matters. Because light bulbs can emit a non-continuous 9r uneven spectrum which might be okay for some types of materials but not others. I once used florescent light bulbs that made some green clothes look unnaturally vivid. If I brought it to sunlight, it looked very muted green.
I can't help but think the Peter and Pete channel is satirical. I mean, nobody can be this delusional, right?
Yeah, there's no way its real..the tv screen explanation had me thinking but the banana thing really gave it away
I agree.
Has to be. They're making it up on the spot
I genuinely hope for humanity that they are
Take a look at their channel before coming to this conclusion. They're flat earthers apparently. If they weren't flerfs, and if their channel wasn't completely dedicated to spreading scientific misinformation, I'd maybe conclude from watching this video that they must be joking. Unfortunately though, the evidence points towards them being totally serious.
These two are the definition of “echo chamber”, one is saying something the other one is repeating 😂
How dare you...
..you..
..ou...
...u....
Yeah, the echo chamber is between their ears.
I like the part where their names are echos of each other
@@jgulner I bet one of their names isn’t even Pete. It’s just one of them said I’m Peter and the other guy just echoed saying I’m Pete 😂
Pete's one brain cell is just bouncing ideas off Peter's one
As a theatre lighting designer and set designer I shall repeat to pete and peter that 'Light isn't the same as paint'.
Wot diabolical heresy is this!
Subtractive CYM mixing is,. Additive RGB mixing is not.
@@northernlighter ummm, I think thats his point ... CYM mixing is subtractive and a result of reflected light.
so you are saying that i can't sniff light? get real
@@BarioIDL well, im not sure how to explain the sneezing brought on by sunlight in that case.
Ok. . . when P & P got to the whole "banana's are yellow, but they're not moving" part in their vid, I couldnt' help but think they've GOT to be trolling their audience!
Checkmate Atheists!
Maybe they are trolling, but I can understand the argument they are making:
We see red and green in movement as yellow. We see red green and blue light together as white. If we can assume white light is made up of red green and blue light why wouldn't we assume that yellow is composed of red and green in motion?
Of course we know more about light than those two observations and it's still an absurd argument, but I'm not sure it's absurd enough to say that nobody could believe in it.
Poe's Law is strong with them, so they are extremely persistent trolls, or just idiots 😅
They're strawmanning Physics Girl lol
@@P3dotme yeah they obviously confused light being emitted Vs light being reflected.
They don't get that a banana is yellow because of the way it reflects the light into their eyes, while an RGB screen produces colours by emitting certain frequencies.
I bet Pete and Pete would be amazed at what happens when you hold a banana under a green light!
I'd be very interested to see, how Peter&Pete would explain white light being split into colors through a glass prism, if they don't belive that white light is made up of other colors...
the colour is made inside your brain, light has no colour only wavelength information. all photons are the same, other than energy levels. they are grey.
@@HarryNicNicholas White light from our sun is still made up of photons of a wide range of wavelengths. These photons refract differently based on their wavelength. Hence, rainbow effect.
@@HarryNicNicholas Even in that argumentation photons would be invisible - not grey. You can't "see" them, you can only destroy (absorb) them to measure their energy.
@@HarryNicNicholas so electronic colourometers are fake?
@Harry "Nic" Nicholas And flavors don't exist, only your brain interpreting different molecular compounds. And sound doesn't exist, only your brain interpreting different wavelengths of air vibration. Your point?
When they got to the banana bit it started to feel like a comedy sketch
I found it amusing that technically the banana is indeed a collection of red and green lights ... when viewed on a computer screen.
My immediate reaction was that it's an elaborate troll, yes.
Also the way that they bounce off of each other as if they share a mind or something. Their ideas of how anything works are so incredibly deluded that it *has* to be intentional
Technology Connection told that RGB white is different from sunlight white, but at least he had a point. Because the missing frequencies in RGB lamps, objects, what reflect only very specific wavelengths, can look weird.
"Brown. It's orange with context"
@@heavyecho1 And that's why you can't have brown light, only orange
Well TC was correct as neither RGB light nor sunlight tends to contain ALL frequencies. The sunlight "formula" is a lot more complex than the purpose designed LED spectrum though that has a sharp preference for the main receptive frequency bands of a human eye...
@@Ugly_German_Truths I am in a camp where pretty much nothing on computers or similar seems to match up particularly well with how things look in real life.
The images on computers have a sort of "tint" that there is no way to compensate for (and I can't give the tint a name, because it is a color that does not exist on the color wheel or on the rainbows as shown on computers). Meanwhile, in real life, there is another range of colors (between green and blue) that are different from those shown on computers (where cyan would be, there is a different color). The mystery color seems to be right around 500nm or so (this is also the dominant color at low light levels).
(I am left though to wonder if the tint could be reduced if there were a 4th blue-green element with the average of the other 3, but no way to test this).
However, I have also noted that I have photo-sensitivity issues, and my ability to see stuff is adversely effected by bright light. For me, anything much over 500-1000 lux results in visual impairment; with daylight being nearly blinding (excessive palinopsia-like effects from pretty much any brightly lit surface, until vision is nearly entirely burnt-in images and trails), but can be compensated for with shade-5 or shade-7 welding glasses (cat-4 sunglasses sorta work, but not quite dark enough, but at least they don't make everything green...).
I suspect these may be related.
I don't have any particular name for whatever is going on in my case though.
Nor do I have any evidence that it isn't just a psychological effect or similar (admittedly, I have some other issues, am also autistic, ...).
@@BGBTech That's absolutely correct. If you look at a color space diagram, you will notice that fully saturated colors between about 485 and 530 nm (which is turquoise to green) are outside even of virtually every color space standard including ProPhoto RGB (the commonly used AdobeRGB and sRGB cover even less), let alone what screens can actually render. So when a screen is advertised with "98% of sRGB space", it's really not that great and one can expect rather shitty greens.
Remember, Peter and Pete think clouds are made of salt
Well have you eaten a cloud?
@@ExistenceUniversity I have. It didn't enjoy being eaten.
@@jcdenton7564 See, it was salty about being ate
I don't want to visit their channel. Are you actually serious here?
@@Gandhi_Physique unfortunately, yes…. They’re this dumb
Thank God Pete and Peter haven't tackled green bananas turning yellow over time. Obviously it's because they are curved and not flat.
Great video 👍 (except for the outro)
They're not really curved, it's just that you're looking at them through round eyes.
/s
Obviously the bananas turn yellow by absorbing vibrating Red light from their surroundings. So if you want your nanners to ripen more slowly, keep them away from tomatoes... unless the tomatoes are ALSO green, which would keep the nanners green forever. The real trick is preventing the tomatoes from turning red, which I think requires blueberries.
I suspect a robust belief in God is the background note with these two.
The earth is Banana shaped - citation: Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
And when they get overripe and full of sugar, they get blotchy brown, and are really delicious! Now, I can make brown with paint box paints, but I'm not sure what combination of lights make brown.
Another thing to note about led light is that an led of a certain color, ONLY EMITS THAT PURE COLOR. An OLED display is not filtering a white backlight like an LCD screen does. So their "washed out" argument falls apart as soon as any direct view LED screen is used.
P&P aren't just confused about how light works .... pretty much everything in reality confuses them ... their 'in our opinion' videos are comedy gold 🤣
They know exactly what they are doing, they are not as stupid as they pretend to be.
Best way to explain them
It's just standard human tendency to knee-jerk, 'nah-uh!' sans bias correction.
It's probably a lot of fun..
When people talk stupid stuff all the time it's no longer a comedy, it's tragedy.
they would be great down the pub.
I can not believe that Pete and Peter is anything else than a parody of 70's kids TV.
Woah woah 70's? I'm an elder millenial but I'm not THAT old. Pete & Pete came out in '91. And I have an aversion to creamed corn to this date.
Germs, of course, originate in Germany. Thanks, ants. Thants.
"To me, to you, to me, to you!", Chuckle Brothers anyone?
@@chrisclarke7274 Well, they are better staffed than the Chuckle? Brothers.
All above,,please link a video showing images or moving images of earth from space. Please though, no computer generated images.
So if I shine three blue lights in this same way, do I get white light (according to Peter and Pete's logic) where the three blues merge together due to the triple blue intensity? I'm going to say no, and I'll just get blue light.
With laser projectors, you can do the experiment and control for intensity... Three laser projectors, so you have a known intensity, stacked and tuned so that they project the same image (keystoning the top and bottom projectors' images will allow this) and then turn all three on, each projecting a blue circle... The circle will be intense... but will be *_blue._* Then change the top projector's circle to red, and the bottom to green. Yay, white. And for the coup de gras, just turn off the top and bottom and project the standard RGB Venn diagram.
Pete and Peter sat on a fence, but always one would fall off... first one, then the other.
The explanation, after a long time, was finally found to be that whenever one fell off, the other was just _a little_ more on.
Calling what they think "logic" might be a bit ambitious
That’s a fab suggestion
Good point!
Except everyone knows blue is a 'cool' color, so it won't heat up..
It's so cute how Peter & Pete finish each other's sentences. What a charming married couple they make.
9:15 - Actually, yellow surfaces COULD be reflecting red and green and absorbing yellow wavelengths. Most of the time this doesn't happen, but you would never know unless you used a prism to split the light to see what bands the surface is reflecting.
This is why lightbulb CRI matters. Because light bulbs can emit a non-continuous or uneven spectrum which might be okay for some types of materials but not others. I once used florescent light bulbs that made some green clothes look unnaturally vivid. If I brought it to sunlight, it looked very muted green.
I'm going to go buy a Nikon P1000 and zoom in on a banana to see if I can resolve the tiny spinning red and green disks. 😂
All you need now is to call your banana Mr Peel
I've always believed that the fact that these bananas aren't moving is the real problem.
Fun fact*: if you get the bananas spinning fast enough to counteract their 'internal spin', you will see the red and green again.
*No, not really. XD
White light only consumes more power on OLED displays, LCD displays have backlight that always creates the same amount of white light which is then blocked by the LCD so same amount of power is used no matter what is being displayed (assuming SDR display, HDR varies the amount of backlight, and there is tiny amount of energy used to twist the LCD crystals, so technically there is small difference in power used depending on the image displayed)
SDR tvs often have variable backlights, as it's impossible to achieve true blacks with always on backlights. HDR tvs take the technique, and include even finer controllable zones to achieve richer colors.
3:15 I actually laughed out loud at “these bananas aren’t moving” I’m soooo glad that you watch these muppets so I don’t have to! I really hope they are just trolling and not that stupid.
It's a strawman
The most delicious irony is that any banana viewed digitially absolutey IS made up of red, green, and blue and contain absolutely no yellow, regardless of what bananas are doing in the real world.
I am thoroughly convinced that they are putting us on... but I always love a good science breakdown, Thanks for the color theory lesson Dave 👍
I have argued with them, and I am equally convinced they are just having a laugh. It was after I spoke of superheated steam, they made up some equipment, and it was just too well done for flat earthers.
It's not theroy it's scientific factual evidence
@grahvis that's because they have watched other Dick & Doms do it and being lonely virgins they though, Hay let's do it. Now earth has another two to deal with
@@David-gr8rh aka theory
yeah, those two are clownish POEs. not real flerfdom flerfers.
Those ID:10T's will be having their mind blown if they hear about SUBSTRACTIVE (usually CMY+K) color mixing done in printing (for example) in contrast to ADDITIVE mixing done with TV's or used in cameras (usually RGB/BGR) :D
THAT'S NOT REAL!! waaahaaahaaa😥😥😥
"I mean, it must be because the ink is so cold!"
Peter and Pete are the proof that if you put some heads together, you might well hear a hollow noise.
Tangentially related: I did an experiment where I looked at a bright red light source in order to tire my red receptors (L-Cones) and then switched to looking at green light source shone on a white wall. Where the bright red LEDs had been in my vision, I was hoping to see a color I had never seen before (hyperbolic green). The experiment worked, I really did see a color I had never seen before, but I would have called it a variation of blue, not 'green'. I had a neighbor try to same experiment and her description was effectively identical (a color she had never seen, and she would call it blue)
"The color out of space"? ;)
I would expect that. The rebound of red saturation is green, though it can overlap deeply into green.
Since it's only seeing green - no red at all, _and_ a spot that's super-duper anti-red..
The only thing left for your slightly perplexed brain to work with is, _"I can see the green, but that spot ain't same green, and it's super-cereal not red at all, so.. let's tell him.. uhh.. well, tell him 'blue-somethingish,' I reckon."_
Try the same experiment with but using full spectrum white on a green area with a bright green swatch smaller that your saturation spot..
Maybe also an RGB light.. IDK
Another different trick is to use a camera flash in your eyes, then 'grab' the flash spot with your 'fingers' and throw it directly away from you.. LOL it 'flies away' across the room!
interesting, I kinda want to try that now
They've managed to get people to see yellowy-blue by inducing currents in brains, using magnetic fields. Normally that's not perceivable, though it is a mix of colours that exists in reality. Your brain would just see it as white, though.
I don't know why but everytime I hear someone explaining light and how it interacts with our eyes and brain I get goosebumps. Never ceases to amaze me how complex and interesting the human body is.
Didn’t they say clouds are made of salt? They are a pair of harmless sweet nutcases, so bizarre they get treated seriously.
"In our opinion..." Validity of claim summarised in 3 words.
Pete&Peter's deadpan delivery is what puts them in the top tier of Po.
As a welder, I have some input on this. The diodes in your screen do not have enough brightness to make the colors “wash out”, or make them so bright that it only appears white. In welding, we do see that sort of intensity. The electric arcs we work around are technically a violet/blue color, but their brightness is so intense that the center appears white. The difference is, the electric arc is _so bright_ that we have to wear protective headgear to shield our eyes, because staring at it can cause rapid damage to your corneas. You have to cover up around it to prevent sunburn, even. And it can do this from 30+ feet away, despite the inverse square law, which says light decreases in intensity over distance. Your screen is nowhere near bright enough to do that, so that means the color you are seeing on your screen is, in fact, actually white and not “blown out.”
Arc produce a lot of UV-light and that's why it burns, not because it is just bright.
@@XtreeM_FaiL Yes, Yes they are. I kind of alluded to that by saying the electric arc was violet/blue in color, and it can give you sunburn. It does this remarkably quickly for such a tiny arc, because it’s very intense.
@@XtreeM_FaiL basically the arc gives off mostly light in the blue-to-UV range, which is more energetic to begin with, but also it’s very intense. Hence why it can give you sunburn and damage your retinas.
Planck‘s law
I think P & P are being satirical. I laughed at the banana are yellow even though they are not spinning green and yellow.
FFS don't tell Peter and Pete about the good old days with film cameras when we had to use colour temperature meters and 81 type filters for colour correction.
I seriously think they are having us on.
imagine what the dog is thinking when he is talking about colors he has never even seen before
He just sees them differently, as dogs light receptors are different than ours. Same color reflected, but looks different due to different receptors.
Thanks for that Steve, really added to the joke.
@@notcrediblesolipsism3851 It's the same reflected light, just different receptors. The light doesn't change.
"There goes the human about his supposed 'colors' again. This is why I pretend like I can't talk."
Feed me Feed me Feed me Feed me Feed me Feed me Feed me Feed me Feed me Feed me Feed me ..
This would be just so easy to test.
Take a red, a green and a blue light that you can individually adjust for "intensity". The "voltage" that is put in. Simple.
And then shine only one of these colours at a surface. Increase the power. If the P&P hypothesis was correct, the light would turn to white at some point. Regardless of whether you used to red, green or blue light... each for have to result in the same "white", if you just put in enough power.
Then use the three lights, set up like in the first experiment. Use a _low_ amount of power to input... and marvel at the mixing colours.
Very simple experiment to do, to test your idea before you show yourself as ignorant on the WorldWideWeb.
Just get an old home projection system from the 80's, that's exactly how they worked...
Yes … but we’ve seen evidence of P&P performing experiments, it wasn’t pretty.
That's exactly what Dave did in the video with the LED panel
Not a bad idea, but if one isn't aware that the spectral content of common light sources like LEDs changes with voltage applied, then you could come to some very wrong conclusions.
@@StringerNews1 So, for a red LED that (for example) is advertised to emit light at 650 nm - what is the minimum and maximum wavelengths actually produced when the voltage applied is swept from 0 to the device's maximum?
I just realized how far technology has come. After seeing all these pixels magnified and then realizing that this pixels are on your phone screen so small you almost can't see them individually. 🤯 This amazes me every time.
The heat spot causing white is instantly disproved by just using 3 of the same colour light. If 3 overlapping red lights don't create white then the colour must be valid
Imagine how many pixels a mantis shrimp’s TV would have to use in order to recreate their world 😱
and waterproofing..
i think you'd need to use something with a variable frequency instead of just RGB
you can already do things at home like trying to light up a yellow cloth with yellow on your phone, and the yellow cloth not lighting up
Obviously if you spin the banana it will appear to have red and green stripes
I literally facepalmed myself alone in my room at the bananas argument. My god.
"A banana is yellow, not red and green. Therefore red and green can't make yellow."
- Peter and Pete trying their hand at logic again.
With most LCD panels white will use the least power. In practice it's hardly much because the back light is always lit.
I have RGB LED lights in my home. I also have objects that are yellow, pink, and orange. Under a green light, those objects are ALL green. Under a purple light, bananas appears orange. Only other light sources remain the same color.
13:41 most screens actually work by obscuring light emitted from a diffuse backlight which means even tho you're displaying black the backlight is still on
I think we should try shining a light into one of their ears and measuring what comes out the opposite ear 😂.
It's been done.. I think it's called the double sh¡t experiment.. comes out brown..
Another fine example of the trend of them going, "Don't listen to them, they just made that stuff up. Listen to me, and the stuff I made up".
Say what?
One needs to remember that mixing color has different result in the case of mixing light and mixing paint. The combination of colors which gives you white in the case of light will result in black (or very close to it) in the case of paints. This is because in the case of paints you do not fill gaps in light spectrum but rather in absorption spectrum (parts of the spectrum which do not reflect any light).
Ah! My partner and I often comment that when our young grandchildren come over and do some painting (pictures not decorating 😂) they always find brown when mixing the paints. Same happens with plasticine clay.
Subtractive colour mixing. It used to confuse me when I first started using ink-jet printers, 'why aren't the bloody colours the same as the screen' moments. :)
Oh, those guys! I've had a pleasure of being a target of one of their videos 😁
"and it's incredibly dim" - just like Peter and Pete.
Most of what I learned about color vision was from the Feynman lectures, Book 1, Chapter 35 named, you guess it, "Color vision". It is easy to find (legally) online. It was even before I started studying physics. Later on, this topic must have been deemed so obvious by my Physics 101 professor that he just mentioned adding up colors in his lecture without much detail, learning aids or an experiment. At least I do not remember it, unlike the Feynman chapter.
Thank you for typing Feynman lectures.. 😀
At 10:15, your cameras computer does not see anything as 'yellow'. It sees a value for red and a value for green (and 0 for blue). This gets carried through (although maybe compressed into a palette) until it is displayed, at which point your brain sees it as yellow.
I've always liked the quote from the Captain Disilusion Video:
Why bother imitating reality, when you can imitate an apes perception of reality for 1/3rd the cost
Is really like to hear these guys take on how brown is actually just dark orange.
YES!!!
It's just so entertaining to watch these guys talk over each other saying the same thing. Like.... Do they plan it? Or is it that they have spent literally every second of their lives together?
It would be more correct to say that the RGB levels detected by our eye _determine_ the color we perceive, rather than that these levels allow us to detect true color. If our eyes had different pigments, or more pigments (say, RYGBV), or fewer pigments (as in color blindness) we would categorize various incoming spectra differently, and possibly into more or fewer distinct shades of color. Keep in mind that for any specific shade of color, there are many (infinitely many) different combinations of frequencies which will be detected as that color (like a "red" frequency + a "green" frequency will look like a particular shade of yellow, but there is a pure single "yellow" frequency that will look like that exact same shade of yellow, and many other combinations of multiple precise frequencies will all look like the same yellow). Some colors, like purple, not to mention white and grey, do not have any single frequency that by itself is perceived as that color.
Yeah, imagine if we had a 4th receptor somewhere in the indigo range. That'd be freaking awesome.
@@joda7697 I want a UV and an infrared receptor. Pentachromatic vision ftw.
"There is no oxygen in air."
Isn't it one of the first gaseous elements we ever discovered?
Like millenia ago we knew there oxygen existed as a necessary thing to breathe, we just didn't know it was part of air itself.
Lmmfao, I had to replay the beginning, I kinda repeated it in my head as thank, but it wasn't sitting right, so I went back, yeah nope. It wasn't thank. 🤣 Love @Planarwalk 's videos. Wait till he introduces you to ken wheeler. 😭
Edit: 3:08 :(( @Physics Girl get well soon Dianna, we're all rooting for you. 💕
Get well soon, Physics Girl!
I'm convinced P&P are one guy doing some clever editing to make himself seem like twins. 😂
Probably not but it's funny to think about. They just say the first thing that comes to their head and run with it as an explanation. I think they're Poes.
0:29 loving the dog face the moment that s/he stared at the camera 😍
Nothing but love for you planer walk
Well, strictly speaking, they aren't wrong. Red, Green and Blue doesn't make white light. It looks white to us because of how our eyes work. If you feed that 'white' light through a prism, you won't get the usual rainbow, you'll only see the constituent colour bands.
This video does a decent job to distinguish between the actual spectrum of the light vs how we see it.
Eh... Depends on your definition of white. Because, even incoherent light (from a thermal source usually) does tend to have a peak frequency. Not that you'd be able to pick that out with the naked eye, but still. There's no 'white', really. Only spectra that are nearly constant in intensity over the visible range, which you could argue is how to define white.
If you told Pete and Peter that their excrement doesn't taste good, maybe they'll taste it to prove that it's tastes great?
DO IT....DO IT NOW 😅
"but these bananas...aren't moving." words to live by.
My brain feels like it’s going to leak out of my skull watching those jokers
A lot of people have claimed that P and P are Poes. I'm not sure if they are or not, but it sure isn't hard to believe that they might be.
If they are, they are very good ones.
But that, after all is the original meaning of "Poe's Law". It's not that some people make up stuff they know to be false. It is the realization that _you cannot distinguish_ between the sincere and the made-up.
Their equipment set-ups are too well done for them to be as stupid as they pretend to be.
Wait, this isn't Professor Dave Explains...
I didn't want to say anything 🤣
Some years ago when I did and electronics tech apprenticeship (like 1979), discussions on colour video and the related standards where we could see the RBG guns (at that time CRT's were a large vacuum tube with an electron "gun" per colour) mixing to give various "whites" from warm orangy ones to the harsher bluish whites.
3:14 "But these bananas aren't moving." Oh ... my ... god. Yep he nailed it the bananas aren't moving, so how can they be yellow? Wow. Are they really that dumb?
I am fairly sure they don't believe any of the stuff they spout on their channel. I made a comment on one of their "chemistry" videos and they responded with, "Remember, this is all satire."
Yeah, I got to the same conclusion. They talk such complete shite that it can't possibly be what they think. Really. It can't *possibly* be what they think.
The problem is that there are far too many idiots out there who will not understand the satire and start thinking they are giving their actual opinions and there's where the danger lies.
Are you sure they know what satire means?
They seem to chop and change between excuses whenever they've been shown how blatantly dumb their explanations are, which is basically all the time. That level of stupid has to penetrate even the dumbest of noggins eventually, but the density of noggin encasing Pathetic and Pathetic's cranial vacuum is on par with Neutronium.
Their presentation is very similar to actors doing improv - repeating what the other said and making up responses on the spot. Based on that I could be convinced they were doing satire. However, the topics they choose to "satirize" seem just esoteric enough that comedy doesn't seem to be the goal. Satire only works if the vast majority of the audience recognizes it as satire. If only a few people "get it" then it is either really poor satire (and what's the point in that?) or it is the "truth" of a fool.
@@HenrikDanielsson Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Derp's entire shtick is unintentional satire at their expense.
As a comedy duo they remind me a bit of Pete and Dud!
More like Dud and Dud.
"This bloke came up to me .."
@@awatt "My wife has cancer of the universe".
@@ShizukuSeiji Brilliant!
A very good explanation video without massively taking the piss out of those two.
I think Peter&Pete are fairly smart. Not science-smart, but RUclips smart. They know there's a market for flat-earthers, and they know science kills the flat earth, so "science has to be lying". If science is lying about the shape of the earth, it can be lying about anything else! So, they make a channel, they look for "alternative" reasons for stuff that science had the facts for hundreds of years, and publish videos.
It's win-win-win: They construct the argument that science is lying, they give "examples" for flat earthers that science is lying, and they make a video (profit).
Also, they don't need to think too hard nor do experiments, just rambling is enough, as everyone knows that flat earthers and science deniers will blind-trust what already confirms their beliefs while if exposed to anything that debunks them they will make a little crab spin dance with their hands on their ears shouting "la la la I CAN'T HEAR YOU la la la CGI la la la BIG CORP SHILL la la la SHOO LUCIFER SHOO! la la la".
Spot-on, well said 👏
As someone who worked in computer graphics and imaging for nearly a decade, requiring me to intimately understand the components of color, various color spaces, and how the eye perceives hue, saturation, and brightness, Peter and Pete's explanations of light and color deeply offend me. It's OK to be ignorant of something if you haven't studied it, but it's another thing to treat that ignorance as though it's knowledge and to try to promote that ignorance as "truth". They seriously need to get out of their almost-literal echo chamber.
Thanks for debunking their pseudoscience.
The things people get "offended" by these days …
@@Anvilshock _"The things people get "offended" by these days …"_
You mean like being offended by someone else being offended? 😆
@@HiEv001 Didn't know simply remarking on something is now considered taking offense … you know, as opposed to actually stating to have taken offense …
@@Anvilshock Well, if you remark about things in a way that indicates annoyance, then yes, by the very definition of the word "offense", you've taken offense.
offense (noun)
- annoyance or resentment brought about by a perceived insult to or disregard for oneself or one's standards or principles.
Being offended isn't _necessarily_ the grand emotional state that you apparently think it is, though it does also include such elevated emotional levels as well.
@@HiEv001 Glad you used the right operative word "perceived" in your quote. Now read my initial response again. Also, thank you for proving that you're talking out of your rear by demonstrating that you don't know how dictionaries work.
Mr. Mckeegan, You are a great teacher along with my father. He worked at Teletype his whole life and also fixed television sets on the side. He would bring me and show me with a magnifying glass that color television is made out of red green and blue pixels. I miss pops!
I remember looking really, really close at the tv when I was a kid and seeing the little red, green, blue rectangles.
I will personally record you some new music to cleanse your palate.
And I just emailed it you. Enjoy, use as you see fit!
Aww-
No such thing as white light; only combinations of frequencies of electromagnetic radiation that excite the cones in our retinas in proportions that we perceive as white.
Most of our color technology (printing, cameras, screens, digital image formats, etc) is highly specific to how human vision works and fails to capture the whole story.
bruh i am learning so much from these videos man thank you
"Pete & Peter are stupid. Clearly you can see that the bananas ARE spinning. They're just spinning in the 4th dimension so most humans don't notice." -- A Lizard Person
I like how Peter is waiting for Pete to make something up so they can agree. It gives it a good cadence with a hefty dose of Poe's Law winking at you.
Thanks for the upload, it's a nice distraction at a difficult time.
1:50 so cute when couples finish each other phrases 😍
I now desperately want someone to paint a red plastic toy banana with lots of tiny green dots.
"Are the yellow banana made of red and green?"
Well you watching them on screen, so technically yes.
The bit about the banana made me LOL. It reminded me of "Spinal Tap"!
If the colors from 3 LED's are so intense that it washes out and turns white, then it shouldn't matter what color those LEDs are. So if you shine 3 blue lights on the same spot, you should get white. This doesn't happen. You just get more blue light.
His notion of “washed out colours” is on par with whole “can’t feel the Earth moving” thing. Troubling stuff indeed.
In fairness, the image of bananas they're looking at is rendered on an RGB display of some type, so it actually is made up of red and green. The bananas in the photo shoot were yellow.
Oh I really like the EMW chart at about 14:49! It's just so kid! I now feel I may just be too old for your channel though!
Upon reading the title, I was expecting them to make the much more sound argument that white light produced from single wavelength RGB sources results in a very incomplete spectrum which one might struggle to call "white" in a meaningful sense. It would appear that my expectations of P&P were too great.
Well done. 😊
These guys are the masters of ad hoc reasoning.
Bananas are yellow?
It seems like the ones I buy from the store, they are always either green or brown. The fabled yellow banana never survives long enough to actually eat them in the prime of their ripeness
G'day Rusty, Dave & Planarwalk,
🐰🥚Have a Verry Hoppy Easter
Interestingly, the "red" cones also absorb in the short wavelength end of the "blue" part of the spectrum, which is why red+blue appears (violet) purple! This absorption band is often left off the absorption spectra of the cones.
One thing they do correctly is constantly saying "in our opinion", that does at least show they're open to counter arguments.
No, they're not: they block any critic who posts on more than 3 or 4 of their videos, and they falsify quotes from sources that they cite as "support".
As someone who does astrophotography with a mono camera and LRGB filters, those guys gave me PTSD.
But cudos to Dave for taking a bunch of idiotic ideas and make a popular scientific video aout of them. You have infinitely more patience, than I could ever muster!
I accidently damaged the polarizing filter on my old laptop so I removed it completely.
Sitting in a cafe I was wearing polarized sunglasses and typing away. I kept hearing people behind me whispering. Then I realized all they were seeing was a white screen it made me burst out in laughter. So I turned and showed them. They had no idea they thought I was crazy. But I still have the laptop and use it to mess with people.
That's awesome!
Amazing, so you could watch anything without other people seeing it
@@BurningLemon1970
Unless they had polarized sun glasses on too, they're pretty common..
@@BurningLemon1970 Yes.
@@Dr.JustIsWrong That they are.
I use it at home for mind reading tricks for new people at parties.
I tell them I invented a device connected to my mind that can read my emails. I have them send a message, but it comes up on my computer, but I pretend I am reading it with my mind. Gets a laugh when I hand them the glasses.
They look like a single guy trying to make a camera trick to talk to himself, but he's got the timing wrong and keeps talking over the other clip of himself.
Hi! I'd like to know how the magenta LED display on the top left corner behind you works! It would be easier to explain that than how Pork and Porker's heads work.
Fun fact about RGB light sources and reflecting that light vs looking directly at those sources (like a monitor):
While RGB is completely adequate for monitors because of the reasons described in the video, it is not all that good for reflected light. In fact, when an RG light source attempts to illuminate a yellow banana, for example, that banana won't look quite right, because the light is almost but not quite perfectly reflected. It's a similar reason why "store lighting" doesn't look quite as the same as "outdoor lighting", despite them both being "white".
So to adjust for this inability of RGB lighting to not illuminate certain "between" colors as well (which is very important to do, by the way, in stage lighting and this deficiency is why many lighting designers prefer older incandescent sources with color filters over newer LED lights), the manufacturers of these RGB light fixtures are starting to expand the LED arrays into new colors: the most common is a dedicated White LED (Warm, Cool, Neutral), followed by Amber. Less common but coming more into use are other colors like Lime, Indigo, and Deep Red, and UV.
All these new colors to hit those sections of the spectrum missed by RGB arrays and "pop out" more colors, providing a richer, more saturated look in the objects being illuminated due to the fact that the actual wavelengths are being reflected rather than a mix of wavelengths that are approximating the color.
(So now you've got arrays like RGB, RGBW, RGBA, RGBAWUV... one of the most advanced arrays is in the ETC Source4 Lustr 3, with RGBAILCDr (Red, Green, Blue, Amber, Indigo, Lime, Cyan, Deep Red), which, theoretically, should produce enough individual wavelengths across the spectrum that it would be hard to distinguish between a mix of wavelengths for a color approximation vs the specific wavelength of the color.
thumb up for the various ETC high color rendition lights. (which whould lead on a tangent towards the different requirements of the art/museum market and for example broadcast/digital cine vs. other applications...)