Hmmmmmmmmm… From a high level perspective you need to know the reflectivity of your combined pigments at that wavelength. If it’s the same, they will look the same.
I don’t know of anything easy you can use, but would suggest trying to find reflectance curves for each pigment you have available and making combinations that subtract to the same value at 589nm, or since 589 should be basically yellow, make up some colors where Y is constant and you change the ratio of C to R and try them out?
That’s true! Using RGB alone will not be enough to calculate this! Two materials that might appear equally yellow under white sunlight may appear different shades of yellow under sodium light. Technology Connections did a great video about the difference: piped.video/watch?v=uYbdx4I7STg
edit: he starts talking about sodium light in particular at 11:14
Is there an equation for this? Like y = f(x) where y is your choice of gray and x is your color. Maybe you can empirically find “f” by fitting randomly created “x” with the resulting “y”.
If “f” can be approximated and maybe there’s something special about it so that you can find the inverse. Otherwise, you could always just generate a bunch of “x*” again, feed through “f”, and see whether the output “y*” matches your chosen gray.
Would it count as easy to make the colors in a photo editing tool (picking things of the same value and saturation but different hues) and then converting to the CMYK designation?
Looking at the color spectrum, have you just tried and colors in the green to blue to purple range? I don’t think you need a Python library for this, I think you need to experiment. There’s a lot of dependence on the reflectivity of the material you’re looking at in addition to the color you see under sunlight or even indoor light with broad spectrum.
Try blue and green and see if both look the same under the lamp.
Thinking about this more , you probably want this to develop a curve in your color space that represents something with constant CMYK values for your chosen light source.
E.g. your sodium light is 100% yellow, 10ish % magenta. Any color that varies cyan from 0%-100% and black from 0%-100% should presumably not reflect any additional color information (since the source light doesn’t have any cyan and black is just giving brightness)
I also think this means that as long as you hold Y and M constant, you can vary cyan and black for your comparison colors that will look the same. If you try to vary cyan and yellow or magenta at the same time then your effect probably won’t work.
This is tricky because you have multiple curves in the color space that are valid when just considering a single wavelength. The reality is, your lamp emits a spectrum of light (sharp, but still has a width). There’s also the variability in perception. But I’m not sure what the “bandwidth” of our eyes is and what color resolution humans are capable of detecting.
Different printers have CMYK primaries with different spectra, so there’s not going to be a generic solution. But in principle, CMY can only create a linear combination of three discrete frequency bands, not a continuous spectrum.
The same will be true of the appearance under monochromatic light: you can only make colors that blend the monochromatic appearance of the primaries. So if none of the three primaries has the desired effect, you can’t create the effect by mixing them.
<span style="color:#323232;">May be useful:
</span><span style="color:#323232;">
</span>
So that’s why, Sync tries to load this as an image, but there’s no image link…
But apparently the link still works and is invisible in Sync.
Well I do get a code block so I'm not sure if that's Kbin-specific markdown but I also get a bunch of HTML inside it too. I can't view the raw comment like I could with RES, but I would suspect that the raw Markdown characters should be sent with the post, for the website to support in its style-specific way, or something. This seems more like someone's client or app inappropriately inserting display style information into the post? But I could be totally wrong, I'm not an expert
You make it sound like drinking salt water would solve all of our humanitarian problems or something. Lack of resources is not our problem, lack of fair and reasonable distribution of resources is. Never forget that five or six men own as much as the rest of the world combined.
If we grow some crop with salt water, we will be literally salting the earth, so unless we are talking about hydroponics/aquaponics, that would be very damaging for the soil and environment. That needs to be consider as well.
It’s a good point, but desalination has the same issue. Whenever you use seawater to produce something with almost no salt in it (be it desalinated water or crops), that means the salt has to go somewhere else. Probably in concentrated form.
Desalination may not salt the earth, but brine can create dead zones in the water. There are solutions like diluting it, and there are cases of operators who don’t care. Either way, salt is an issue if you use salt water. Has to go somewhere.
If you’re growing salt-tolerant crops and only ever intend to use that land as farmland, that could arguably be a benefit, don’t have to use as many chemicals to control weeds and pests if the weeds and pests can’t tolerate the salt
Probably need to make sure that the salt is being contained to the farm area, and I’d imagine you would need to periodically flush it with fresh water or something if too much salt begins to accumulate in the soil for even your salt tolerant crops.
Probably need to make sure that the salt is being contained to the farm area, and I’d imagine you would need to periodically flush it with fresh water or something if too much salt begins to accumulate in the soil for even your salt tolerant crops.
That seems hard to manage. And there is also the risk of that salt to reach underground water. I would say that it’s feasible to do it right, but at a high cost.
There are some plants that already grow in seawater, perhaps one way to achieve that effect might be to go about it the other way round, and try to breed or engineer one of these plants into something that can be used as a staple crop? Some quick wiki searching suggests to me that a few species of such plants are edible, though most I could find are so as vegetable type plants and not used like corn or potatoes or such. I did find reference to a salt tolerant plant that can be grown for cooking oil though.
And start farming the seabed to devastate even more ecosystems? I don’t think so. The best solution is actually to have less people. Better use the CRISPR to create some fun viruses.
I wasn’t referring to seaweed on the seabed, I was referring to land plants that grow in seawater. I figure that these kind of plants could be relevant in places like coastal deserts, since seawater is more available than fresh in such places, or in areas that have suffered from severe saltwater intrusion or which become partially flooded by seawater due to sea level rise.
Great question. Since we evolved consuming “fresh”, non-salt, water our physiology revolves around certain set points for normal neurological, renal, and basic cellular function. Consuming salt water changes the osmolality of the blood, which then causes shifts of fluid to try and balance the change of osmolality which negatively effects neurological function since we evolved to function within a strict range of osmolality, sodium level, etc. The body manages this from the pituitary/ adrenal / and renal perspective to maintain neurological function. If you could create a situation where the normal isotonic function is reset to a more hypertonic environment then that would be the start. I’m only familiar with human physiology and pathology but perhaps someone who is familiar with fish physiology could comment on how fish stay “hydrated”.
Well I can’t tell you the exact gene would need to be changed, there are plenty of animals able to deal with the salinity of sea water. Basically the kidney has a certain ability to concentrate salt. The greater the ability the saltier the animal’s urine is and the saltier water can be consumed.
If I am remembering correctly the threshold for salinity of water that can be consumed is up to a level just below that of the threshold of the kidney’s ability to concentrate salt.
So we would not need “super kidneys” just normal ones similar to those of one of many animals in the sea. But we might have a shortened kidney lifespan because of it.
This is such a great question. I have almost zero knowledge of biology so I can’t offer a meaningful answer. I just want to say this really is a genius question.
Not a direct answer, but I want to point out that if you’re considering a technology that will help improve poor people’s lives, you must also consider that technology is prone to the same issues that caused the wealth disparity in the first place. Namely, that only rich people can afford new technologies. Suppose if we really are able to edit human genes to let people drink salt water. Would poor people (the people who may actually need this technology) be able to afford it? Or will it end up just becoming a gimmick for rich people?
As others have pointed out, there’s really no need to be able to drink salt water, since we already have the technology to desalinate water. It’s only that poorer areas don’t have the funding to build desalination plants. You can start to see that it’s the same issue as what I said above - there’s a new technology that would theoretically help poor areas, but then it ends up not benefiting poor people because they can’t afford the technology.
All of this is not to say that new technology is bad. It’s simply that we already have solutions for a lot of societal issues, and the reason we still have those problems is simply because we as a society don’t care enough to distribute the benefits of those solutions fairly
askscience
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.