Re: "When a molecule absorbs certain wavelengths of visible light and transmits or reflects others, the molecule has a color."
It "has a color" not as an "out there" waiting-to-be-discovered, thing-in-itself color, but only via participating (mediating) optic organ cum neurological network (brain) Moreover, if a chromophore is a "region" ("part"), and it's defining quality is a difference in energy levels, this implicitly involves a perceiving structure capable, indeed, programmed to inpute value, i e., categorize/recognize that difference for the purpose of a fight, flight, eat, mate with (or, perhaps ignore) response whether innate or learned for that perception. The "visible" spectrum varies from organism to organism. So does color, especially in the context of cultural influences (for humans).
This is my understanding of what "second generation" cognitive science ala George Lakoff, et al., would say about the wiki article excerpt quoted. (See my "Philosophy in the Flesh" list.)
I'm no physicist but Wikipedia says the following:
"A chromophore is part (or moiety) of a molecule responsible for its color.
"When a molecule absorbs certain wavelengths of visible light and transmits or reflects others, the molecule has a color. A chromophore is a region in a molecule where the energy difference between two different molecular orbitals falls within the range of the visible spectrum."
This doesn't make too much sense. There is no physical part that gives a molecule color, it is a combination of things. And what does this have to do with disks? The article makes a lot more sense.
The part of a molecule that give it its color. According to Engadget, an Israeli company has created a new optical disc that can hold a full terabyte of data by creating a "hologram-like matrix" of chromophores. Future versions may reach capacities of 5TB.
I just think it is incorrect to say that the chromophore is "part of the molecule".
Re: "When a molecule absorbs certain wavelengths of visible light and transmits or reflects others, the molecule has a color."
It "has a color" not as an "out there" waiting-to-be-discovered, thing-in-itself color, but only via participating (mediating) optic organ cum neurological network (brain) Moreover, if a chromophore is a "region" ("part"), and it's defining quality is a difference in energy levels, this implicitly involves a perceiving structure capable, indeed, programmed to inpute value, i e., categorize/recognize that difference for the purpose of a fight, flight, eat, mate with (or, perhaps ignore) response whether innate or learned for that perception. The "visible" spectrum varies from organism to organism. So does color, especially in the context of cultural influences (for humans).
This is my understanding of what "second generation" cognitive science ala George Lakoff, et al., would say about the wiki article excerpt quoted. (See my "Philosophy in the Flesh" list.)
I'm no physicist but Wikipedia says the following:
"A chromophore is part (or moiety) of a molecule responsible for its color.
"When a molecule absorbs certain wavelengths of visible light and transmits or reflects others, the molecule has a color. A chromophore is a region in a molecule where the energy difference between two different molecular orbitals falls within the range of the visible spectrum."
This doesn't make too much sense. There is no physical part that gives a molecule color, it is a combination of things. And what does this have to do with disks? The article makes a lot more sense.
Wow. Who'da thunk it?
The part of a molecule that give it its color. According to Engadget, an Israeli company has created a new optical disc that can hold a full terabyte of data by creating a "hologram-like matrix" of chromophores. Future versions may reach capacities of 5TB.