yeah. half way through the thread, i got confused myself on what we were talking about! I had to reread the whole thing to understand what was going on, even though i was following every new post!

 

 

 

Edit:

 

i've GOT to improve my sPeLlInG

YT2095 said in post # :

the true opposite of red is black, and the true opposite of green is also black

why isn't the opposite of green the absence of green from white?

green is the absence of red and blue from white (light, not paints), so shouldn't those two be opposites? black is just in the middle of those two.

Oh, and you wouldn't have an opposite yourself. I believe the opposites we are talking about are of the particle variety.

I am REALLY getting confused. Ok firstly, we have to make up our minds, what is the opposite of green? BLACK or THE ABSENCE OF GREEN FROM WHITE LIGHT?

There is no opposite.

 

You are getting confused with complementary colours.

hmm... but couldn't u count the NO green as the opposite of green?

Is the absence of a pencil the opposite of a pencil?

 

good point. And what WOULD be the opposite of a pencil? Couldn't it be a perncil in antimatter?

That would just be another pencil.

yeah, but, isn't anti matter the opposite of matter. I heard if these two were put together, they would cancel each other out!

Equal masses of matter and antimatter will annihilate each other with the release of a vast amount of energy.

 

I suppose it depends how you want to define "opposite". Is mutual annihilation one of the criteria? It's difficult to tell. For instance we say wet is the opposite to dry, but one usually annihilates the other.

hmm... you have a point there. How would you think of it?

It's an unusual question.

 

I just thought of an example that does involve mutual annihilation. If you walk East away from a fixed point, then walk back again, you've annihilated your journey by walking East and West.

 

Doesn't really help us find the opposite of green, admittedly.

I heard that light does cancel each other out, te only reason it does not is because of its high frequency, so can't be count light as an anti- of itself?

 

Complex stuff!

Well, like R_E said it is considered to be it's own anti-particle, but the question is "does that make it the opposite to light?", which depends on your definition of 'opposite' as I said above.

oh. I'll need to do a little more thinking on this!

I think I should point out that an "anti-bubble" is not really an anti-bubble, it's a bubble. It just happens to have a non-conventional shape.

 

There's no problem with considering it to be a negative bubble though, but you need to apply the same process for anything you're comparing it to (light, matter, potatoes etc).

yeah. I thought of opposite in the way of negative. Like reversed. Like the bubble you were talking about. Light can also be reversed, complimentary colors. That's was what i was trying to say

But technically, it's not anti-light, only anti-protons are the opposite, BUT light is it's own opposite, so the opposite of green is green! (just kidding)

This is too confusing.

Thanx alot captain! Now i am REALLY confused! lol

That's my job.

lol. I'll get my revenge!!!!!!

Cap'n Refsmmat said in post # :

But technically, it's not anti-light, only anti-protons are the opposite, BUT light is it's own opposite, so the opposite of green is green! (just kidding)

This is too confusing.

 

you present an iteresting idea when talking about a specific color, phase cancelation with addative or subtractive synthesis of color would be interesting from a semantic point of veiw, it could be argued that it would be the opposite of Green, infact it would be a conflicting waveforn, peak to trough in anti-phase. the true opposite it black though, you`de be simply providing a means to obtain black

What's the opposite of a cat?

YT2095 said in post # :

the true opposite it black though, you`de be simply providing a means to obtain black

Reasoning?