The Instigator
14yroldprodigy
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
nohandlebars
Pro (for)
Winning
16 Points

Is black a color?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
nohandlebars
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/24/2013 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,509 times Debate No: 42924
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (17)
Votes (4)

 

14yroldprodigy

Con

I will argue in favor of the resolution that black is indeed not a color.

However, in pigments, black is indeed a color. And in that case, white is not.

Evidence to back up my claim

Electromagnetic Spectrum of Light

The electromagnetic spectrum (Above) is the range of wavelengths and frequencies over electromagnetic radiation. The wavelength of one is the distance between two crests.

For instance, one with a wavelength between 492 to 577 nanometers is green. So, a plant's clorophyll molecules reflect that, while absorbing the rest.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Why does it matter, you ask?

Sunlight (White) is composed of all colors. We are susceptible to heat. The Sun transmits some to the Earth. Rain droplets reflect different ones, emanating from the Sun (Like said). That is how Rainbows appear.

However, it does not consist of black. Let me further prove my point.



Let us use Newton's prism to break white light and study the various wavelengths of each color. Red, yellow, green, etc. is there. However, black is not.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Conclusion

I have come to the conclusion that black is simply the absence of the presences of the electromagnetic spectrum colors, thus not making black one.

Also, I have noticed that 1 person with several alt. accounts has multiple debates about this. Please. I am not that person.
nohandlebars

Pro

Black is a color, and the electromagnetic radiation is just the factors. If you put them together, all the pigment makes black. If black was not a color, we would not be able to see it.
Debate Round No. 1
14yroldprodigy

Con

Definition

Color
- the property of objects that depends on the light that they reflect and is perceived as red, blue, green, or other shades

My opponent's arguments must abide by the definition.

Rebuttals

"Black is a color, and the electromagnetic radiation is just the factors. If you put them together, all the pigment makes black."

Incorrect. White light is composed of all the colors of the Rainbow.

"If black was not a color, we would not be able to see it."

What color would that be? Black. According to the definition, if light is emitted onto a color, it is one. And if so, it would present in the spectrum. However, it is not.

Electromagnetic Spectrum of Light

(Look at the graph above) No matter the wavelengths (The distance between two crests) of an electromagnetic radiation, it can not become black. Therefore, it does not emit light (Does not reflect any, but rather absorbs). Therefore, it is not a color.

I await my opponent's next set of arguments.
nohandlebars

Pro

Black is a color, and is perceived in the same way as red, blue and green and other colors. How does it have any less worth than any of the other colors? If you think not, think about this, black is a shade. Which is also a color. Put a coffee mug on your table with a well lit source of light. On the opposite side of the light, there is a color emitted called black. It is a color *and* a shade.
Yes, that is correct that the color white is composed of all the colors of the rainbow. Give yourself a gold star. But I said that all the pigment conceives the color black. (p.s please be specific, you do agree that white too is a color right?)

[http://www.thefreedictionary.com...] Definition number two: A substance, such as a dye, pigment, or paint, that imparts a hue.

Black is a dye, pigment AND paint that does make (information) known; communicate a color AND shade.

I am not sure how you counter my argument unless you cannot see the color black (and white...?) because 1) You see black, in skin pigment, pupils, animals, ink, hair, nature, everywhere. If black wasn't a color, you wouldn't even be able to dream of it, and it was be completely unknown to human kind, and thus we wouldn't debate over it. So despite not being in a spectrum that you provided, it can still be seen with your very own eyes.

The electromagnetic spectrum does not appear to have the color black, no. Does the color spectrum contain pink and brown or purple or magentia? These are colors right? So your argument should also include those colors.

Please view this website: http://dev.emcelettronica.com...

Look at the spectrum. This unlike yours it does include black.

If you don't agree, please read the Relaxation Oscillator Circuit paragraph. It stats, " the colors white and grey have the same chromaticity, but different luminance levels."

White (which is also a color) gray and black have the same chromaticity. White and black are classic opposites. White, gray and black do have different luminance levels. This results that black has a place in the spectrum. Pink is simply lighter than red, (not sure how to sciencetifically put it) and brown is darker than red, as listed. So if the pink or brown or perhaps.....black ...in this spectrum is not visible to you, then you do know that it does belong in the spectrum.

Also, I forgot to stat in your first argument to please be more specific and put into your own words what a electromagnetic spectrum is. According to my research an electromagnetic spectrum is a the range of wavelengths or frequencies over which electromagnetic radiation extends. The frequencies over which electromagnetic radiation extends? How does this have to do with anything with colors? But in the first paragraph of the website I have asked you to view, it states, "All light is electromagnetic radiation that is visible to the human eye."
So this means that the electromagnetic spectrum is just light visible to the human eye? But black is the absence of light, and it is still visible to the human eye. So please explain me the importance of the electromagnetic spectrum, or else it's irrelevant to our debate.

If I sound aggressive, it is not deliberately. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
14yroldprodigy

Con

Before I nullify my opponent's arguments, I would like to thank him (That's his gender, according to his profile) for accepting this debate.

Rebuttals

"Black is a color, and is perceived in the same way as red, blue and green and other colors. How does it have any less worth than any of the other colors? If you think not, think about this, black is a shade. Which is also a color. Put a coffee mug on your table with a well lit source of light. On the opposite side of the light, there is a color emitted called black. It is a color *and* a shade."

Shades are grey, thus emitting some light. Black does not, thus not making it a color (According to my definition).

"[http://www.thefreedictionary.com......] Definition number two: A substance, such as a dye, pigment, or paint, that imparts a hue.

Black is a dye, pigment AND paint that does make (information) known; communicate a color AND shade.

I am not sure how you counter my argument unless you cannot see the color black (and white...?) because 1) You see black, in skin pigment, pupils, animals, ink, hair, nature, everywhere. If black wasn't a color, you wouldn't even be able to dream of it, and it was be completely unknown to human kind, and thus we wouldn't debate over it. So despite not being in a spectrum that you provided, it can still be seen with your very own eyes."

Like said, in terms of pigment, black is indeed a color.

"The electromagnetic spectrum does not appear to have the color black, no. Does the color spectrum contain pink and brown or purple or magentia? These are colors right? So your argument should also include those colors."

Yes, indeed. Pink, brown, etc. aren't colors.

"Please view this website: http://dev.emcelettronica.com......

Look at the spectrum. This unlike yours it does include black.

If you don't agree, please read the Relaxation Oscillator Circuit paragraph. It stats, " the colors white and grey have the same chromaticity, but different luminance levels.""

The other electromagnetic spectrum (Range of wavelengths and frequencies over electromagnetic radiation) is incorrect. Again, the Sunlight transmits electromagnetic radiation with various wavelengths (Distance between two crests)(Depending on its wavelength, it is coloured). Each rain droplet reflects one, causing a Rainbow to appear. The Rainbow does not consist of black (Neither can white be composed into black), thus not making it a color.

"Also, I forgot to stat in your first argument to please be more specific and put into your own words what a electromagnetic spectrum is. According to my research an electromagnetic spectrum is a the range of wavelengths or frequencies over which electromagnetic radiation extends. The frequencies over which electromagnetic radiation extends? How does this have to do with anything with colors? But in the first paragraph of the website I have asked you to view, it states, "All light is electromagnetic radiation that is visible to the human eye."
So this means that the electromagnetic spectrum is just light visible to the human eye? But black is the absence of light, and it is still visible to the human eye. So please explain me the importance of the electromagnetic spectrum, or else it's irrelevant to our debate."

Like said, white light is composed of all colors. According to my definition, colors emit and possess light. Therefore, the colors white light is composed of are actual colors. Black is not there, thus not making it a color.

I await my opponent's next set of arguments.
nohandlebars

Pro

I'm actually a woman, I just need to change my profile slightly lol.

If black did not emit any light, we would not be able to see it. This means, black does emit light, thus yes it is a color.

Please read my entire argument. Don't debate, or just drop out of you cannot read my entire argument. You've addressed zero of my points. I'm extremely disappointed that my competition is as easy as a whore.
Debate Round No. 3
14yroldprodigy

Con

Rebuttals

"If black did not emit any light, we would not be able to see it. This means, black does emit light, thus yes it is a color."

That's impossible (As we perceive colors). When no light is emitted, there is black.

"Please read my entire argument. Don't debate, or just drop out of you cannot read my entire argument. You've addressed zero of my points. I'm extremely disappointed that my competition is as easy as a whore."

I failed to address ALL of your points? Oh, how about the importance of the electromagnetic spectrum? Huh? Yeah... Actually read it carefully.
nohandlebars

Pro

I'm not going to search for your argument. Don't abuse the copy and paste. So far, you have no proved any vaild points.

If there was no light emitted we would not be able to perceive a color. We wouldn't be able to see it. These colors we can't see are colors that haven't been created. We see black. It is emitted by light. To us, black has the minimal light, but that's just to our eyes. Maybe if we had a different eyes we could perceive no light at all, something beyond black.
Debate Round No. 4
14yroldprodigy

Con

Rebuttals

"if therr was no light emitted we would not be able to perceive a color."

Incorrect.

White light is composed into all colors (According to definition). Therefore, since there is no black, it does not emit light (According to definition again).

Conclusion

- "So far, you have no proved any vaild points."

Actually, I have. We have concluded (From my passage of R1) that true colors emit and possess light. White light is composed of all true colors. Therefore, since black isn't there, it is not a color.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

I thank my opponent for accepting this debate and presenting actual arguments. I appreciate it.
nohandlebars

Pro

"White light is composed into all colors (According to definition). Therefore, since there is no black, it does not emit light (According to definition again)."

No black? Does not emit light? How does that have anything to do with your first sentence? Besides, white, the color, is composed of all the colors. Light being reflected on something determines the color. No black? Clearly there is black, as in my previous examples. If it didn't emit light, then we wouldn't be able to see it. Please look around you to see there is black, and that it emits light. If you didn't see black, then it doesn't emit light. (to straighten it out for you black = emits light)

And I bring up again, please do not make me search for your arguments. As far as I am concerned, all my points made for all the rounds are valid. Any of your replies in my debate, especially your argument in round 3, have all been invalid, unrelated or just plain off topic. Thanks for trying. Your getting pretty good at copy and paste.
Debate Round No. 5
17 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by DudeStop 2 years ago
DudeStop
Plagiarism is when you pretend someone else's idea is your own. Con only admitted to this once he had gotten caught. I'm allowed to take something from Wikipedia, but I'm not allowed to pretend it's my work on a school project.
Posted by nohandlebars 2 years ago
nohandlebars
great..
Posted by Sukhmeet 2 years ago
Sukhmeet
white is all the colors put together
Posted by nohandlebars 2 years ago
nohandlebars
Black and whites absence of color or the entire combination is debatable. But either way in this argument it still means that black is a color. Thank you though
Posted by Sukhmeet 2 years ago
Sukhmeet
Black is the absence of color in physics and the art world
Posted by PeriodicPatriot 2 years ago
PeriodicPatriot
Thank you, nohandlebars!
Posted by nohandlebars 2 years ago
nohandlebars
If this site had a thumbs up button for a comment like on youtube, you'd have a thumbs up PeriodicPatroit
Posted by PeriodicPatriot 2 years ago
PeriodicPatriot
https://ed.grammarly.com... (con)

https://ed.grammarly.com... (pro)

if I were voting now, this is what I'd say:

Who did you agree with"before"the debate?-Pro
Who did you agree with"after"the debate?-Pro
Who had better conduct?-Pro
Who had better spelling and grammar?-Pro
Who made more convincing arguments?-Tied
Who used the most reliable sources?-Tied

Reason for decision: CONDUCT: Con lied to the admittance of plagiarism, saying he 'got approval' for copying work. Alas, there is no such thing as 'borrowing' work when it is not your own. ARGUMENTS: This was a close one. Con however didn't tell what 'electromagnetic spectrum' is in HIS own words. A sign of plagiarism. Also, a sign of plagiarism is when work is not understood, in other words, readers can't understand what is written in the work. I checked the work for plagiarism and you may go to the link above. SPELLING AND GRAMMAR: This was a really close one, but pro won for this one. Again, results above. SOURCES: both did a good job for finding resources. Again, results above.

Note: I did used both pro and con's arguments to check for any signs of plagiarism. Also, that counts for spelling/grammar and sources. That is why I posted the links up above. Thank your for your time.
Posted by a-priori 2 years ago
a-priori
Technically plagiarism is seen as not acknowledging the source of writing (e.g. citing) when it is not your own. Something you did not do in the debate.
Posted by dtaylor971 2 years ago
dtaylor971
Yeah, but that still is a 7 point loss in my book. Even if you have permission, it is not your own work. And I'm voting on this. Sorry.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by PeriodicPatriot 2 years ago
PeriodicPatriot
14yroldprodigynohandlebarsTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: CONDUCT: Con lied to the admittance of plagiarism, saying he 'got approval' for copying work. Alas, there is no such thing as 'borrowing' work when it is not your own. ARGUMENTS: This was a close one. Con however didn't tell what 'electromagnetic spectrum' is in HIS own words. A sign of plagiarism. Also, a sign of plagiarism is when work is not understood, in other words, readers can't understand what is written in the work. SPELLING AND GRAMMAR: This was a really close one, but pro won for this one. SOURCES: both did a good job for finding resources.
Vote Placed by dtaylor971 2 years ago
dtaylor971
14yroldprodigynohandlebarsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Full loss of sources, conduct, and arguments due to the fact that con plagiarized. It is in fact plagiarism if you do not include the source. Not writing your own arguments results in loss of conduct and arguments.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
14yroldprodigynohandlebarsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct for plagiarism. Sources for the same (such poor citations of someone elses work, does harm them... Whereas properly quoted it would have been favorable and not affected conduct). ARGUMENT: The only thing this could rise to is a tie, but failing the cross examination when called out for stealing someone elses work (there was hardly anything else to respond to that round), puts the nail in the coffin. ... ALSO tossing in a R2 definition, does not make it binding.
Vote Placed by TheAmazingAtheist1 2 years ago
TheAmazingAtheist1
14yroldprodigynohandlebarsTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct: Con plagiarized, while Pro wrote his own arguments. S&g: Tied. Arguments: Con, as his arguments were a lot longer and convincing.