this subject is a quick way to blow your mind...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remarks_on_Colour

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/color/

http://web.mit.edu/philos/www/color-biblio.html

I think the guy would have black down pretty well.....

This is exactly why google or computers in general will never have understanding. He knows about orange, but he KNOWS nothing about orange.

Actually, the way we understand colors is far more than what we see. It overlaps the tactile, the auditive (smell, temperature, ect.) and makes extensive use of memory. These are added dimensions to flesh out "knowledge". Mechanical organisms that can incorporate multiple forms of input tied in with memory can/will in fact have understanding (so long as processing is involed), perhaps even surpassing our own understanding one day.

That would seem to suggest that we have no independent understanding of things. That I can't see shapes if I can't smell them, or whathaveyou. If I close my eyes and smell something, it doesn't change the smell when I open my eyes and see what it is. It perhaps places it in a fuller context, but it doesn't change my understanding of the smell. So while I agree that all combining senses provides different contexts that you inform yourself on, the understanding of those senses stays exactly the same. Purple always looks purple when you see purple (even if it is an optical illusion).

I guess I don't understand what you are getting at, perhaps we are getting hung up on words?