When we "see" an object, we seem to have immediate knowledge of
something external to our own body. But physics says that a complicated
process starts from the external object, travels across the intervening
region, and at last reaches the eye. What goes on between the eye
and the brain is a question for the physiologists, and what finally
happens when we "see" is a question for the psychologist. But without
troubling ourselves about what happens after the light reaches the eye,
it is evident that what the physicist has to say is destructive of
the common-sense notion of "seeing." It makes no difference, in this
matter, which of the possible theories we adopt as to the physical
character of light, since all equally make it something utterly
different from what we see. The data of sight, analyzed as much as
possible, resolve themselves into coloured shapes. But the physical
analogue of a colour is a periodic process of a certain frequency
relative to the eye of the observer. The physical world, it seems
natural to infer, is destitute of colour. Moreover, the correspondence
between colours and their physical counterparts is peculiar: colours
are qualities, which are static while they last, whereas their
counterparts are periodic processes, which are in the medium between
the eye and the object which we say we "see." What happens in the
object itself, if it shines by its own light, is the sort of thing
considered in Bohr's theory: a sudden jump of an electron from one
orbit to another. This is very unlike a sensation of (say) red. And
what looks to the eye like a continuous red surface is supposed to be
really a[Pg 134] volume whose apparent colour is due to the fact that some
of the electrons in it are jumping in a certain way. When we say they
are "jumping," we are saying something too pictorial. What we mean is
that they possess an unknown quality called "energy," which is a known
function of a certain number of small integers, and that one or more of
these integers have suddenly changed their values. It may be claimed
as a merit in such theories as Professor Lewis's, considered in the
preceding chapter, that it makes the connection between this process
and the eye rather less indirect than it appears on the undulatory
theory. But even then the sort of sudden transition contemplated by
Bohr is very unlike the perception of a red patch: it is prima
facie quite dissimilar in structure, and unknown as regards its
intrinsic properties.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account