It's all because Reality Is Unrealistic.

FIERCE JUMPER

I chop it all up and mush it together and eat it with a spork. Ketchup on the side.

Thanks for the 'quality' boost on my video

*beg

He's wrong about "who" and "that".

I watched this with this face:
D:

A close-up of the image would have been nice.

In a perfect world...
>> ^grinter:

want one. too lazy to make one.
vi will make me one?

Thank you!
In reply to this comment by lucky760:
Happy 33rd birthday! May flower petals rain down upon you this very day.

>> ^eric3579:

Congrats on that bronze star!
Thanks, chaps!

Thank you for promoting the Powaqqatsi clip I submitted. It's a great piece; I only wish I could have been at the concert! Anyway, thanks again, it's nice to see it published.
In reply to this comment by oritteropo:
*promote

>> ^Payback:

Anyone else beginning to think all this exposure is going to her head? She was WAY cuter sounding before. Now she's kinda arrogant.
I'm not getting that at all. I think she sounds like she's having fun.

>> ^rgnjc:

This girl is retarded.

Wrong.

Hi, thank you for taking the time to reply, and sorry I didn't write back straight away. Obviously you're right in that they clearly don't mean to say that everything beyond the visible is pink, because that's self-evidently not true, and they know it, because they're not stupid. So yeah, it's all bit "well, obviously", if you see what I mean. Again, thanks for the considered reply

In reply to this comment by oritteropo:
I watched it again, and they're not saying that radio waves are pink, they're saying that you can't see them... but that pink fills the spot on the colour wheel that would otherwise be filled by the invisible radiation.

They could've made it clearer, but they didn't say what you thought. What they did say isn't exactly wrong just not clear.

Fair enough that it's hardly worth counting UV vision in certain lens enhanced people, I just thought it was cool.
In reply to this comment by FlowersInHisHair:
>> ^oritteropo:

I think they mean that if you try to wrap the visible spectrum around a colour wheel, then it works for the red,green,blue,violet part and then stops working when you get to the magenta/pink/negative green part.
To quibble a little with your claim that anything out of the visisble spectrum is invisible, people who have had cataract surgery can see potentially light slightly outside the normal visible range (all right, not gamma rays, but still)... http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/605905
>> ^FlowersInHisHair:
The claim made in the video that we see all the non-visible wavelengths of light/EM radiation as pink is patently false. We know this because gamma rays aren't pink, they're invisible.


That's not what they're saying though. They are quite clearly saying that the vast area outside the tiny wavelengths we can see are perceived by human eyes as pink. If that were true, there would be so much light bouncing around that that we percieved as pink that we wouldn't be able to make anything else out.

And I quibble with your quibble: anything outside of the visible spectrum is invisible by definition, isn't it? The slight increase in the visible spectrum in a minority of the people who've ever had cataract surgery is hardly worth counting in this regard as it's not considered normal vision.