What you know, more tines than you know, is limited by the circles you keep. So, when something unknown enters the den of static amateurs, see: snobby-hobby] does it rouse… if so, what? Or, is the response a shrugish ‘so what’ The science that color emulsion response measurement changes… at the least, too late in my lab career, it explained the failure points of ‘neutral’ separation systems across emulsion brands… Seems big to me..

The stuff that fills in the lines…



“His account of the development of science held that science enjoys periods of stable growth punctuated by revisionary revolutions. To this thesis, Kuhn added the controversial ‘incommensurability thesis’, that theories from differing periods suffer from certain deep kinds of failure of comparability.” plato.stanford.edu/entries/thomas-kuhn/

— https://www.columbia.edu/cu/tract/projects/complexity-theory/kuhn-the-structure-of-scien.pdf

>>

“The operations and measurements that a scientist undertakes in the laboratory are not “the given” of experience but rather “the collected with difficulty”. They are not what the scientist sees—at least not before his research is well advanced and his attention focused. Rather, they are concrete indices to the content of more elementary perceptions, and as such they are selected for the close scrutiny of normal research only because they promise opportunity for the fruitful elaboration of an accepted paradigm. Far more clearly than the immediate experience from which they in part derive, operations and measurements are paradigm-determined. Science does not deal in all possible laboratory manipulations. Instead, it selects those relevant to the juxtaposition of a paradigm with the immediate experience that that paradigm has partially determined. As a result, scientists with different paradigms engage in different concrete laboratory manipulations.”

>> Finding a new paradigm 

One day, Roxana was researching mathematical models of color perception, when a paper put her on a discovery path that lasted several years, marked by periods of excitement and fear, she says.

1. I read a 1963 David MacAdam paper and noticed that the phenomenon that he observed (diminishing returns) was in conflict with the Riemannian model. Since that paper was 50 years old, I assumed everyone knew that.
2. For about a year, I searched for a paper or book that would state the fact explicitly and could not find one. I started to wonder if nobody had noticed the contradiction but thought it was absurd and I was just being too full of myself.
3. Then one day on my search, I came across the 1979 MacAdam paper (where he writes that there is no reason to question the Riemannian model) and thought: Well, if not even the guy who discovered diminishing returns sees the contradiction, maybe it is indeed true that nobody has…
4. So, we decided to write the paper. But I totally expected that one of the reviewers or one of the readers would point out the place where the contradiction had been stated, and that we had just not been able to find it. But, well, so far so good…

>> Roxana now believes perceived hue is a “pure and logical phenomenon” without learned classification, cultural bias or personal preference. ….

Roxana’s team found that Schrödinger had stopped short before completing his mission because he used the “neutral axis” as a reference point without defining it. The neutral axis is the central, achromatic line of grays connecting black to white in 3D color space, serving as the foundation for measuring color saturation and hue.

“The 2022 discovery allowed us to define hue, saturation and lightness purely geometrically for the first time,” she says. “That was Schrödinger’s big goal, but it was not possible in a Riemannian space.” RCS..

THE OLD. PRIOR FOUNDATIONS USED TO BUILD

NOTE: MacAdam was a key researcher on color charts, illiminants, etc.

— https://doi.org/10.1002/col.5080060110

i’m always surprised, but frequently find that the failures in a hobby space lack curiosity about the subject; and I suspect that they also failed in their work space for the same reason .. they thought they knew more than they did and they were not curious enough to doubt them self .. [hence my calling them vBulls, or snobby-hobbiests