Very cool, thank you! — especially the openness toward Goethe’s approach, which is rarely treated sympathetically...
One small historical note: Aristotle did not actually hold a particle theory of light. In De Anima (II.7) he famously defines light as “the actuality of the transparent as transparent.” In other words, light for Aristotle is not a stream of particles traveling through space but the actualized state of a transparent medium such as air or water when illuminated by a luminous body. In that respect his account is closer to a kind of field-like conception than to the atomistic emission theories of Democritus.
On Goethe: the characterization of his color theory as purely qualitative is understandable I think, but recent experimental work has complicated that picture. Physicists such as Matthias Rang and collaborators have reconstructed Goethe’s prism experiments and shown that the boundary spectra Goethe described at light–dark edges correspond to real optical phenomena that can be modeled quantitatively, not only the phenomenal aspect of it. Goethe himself did not develop a mathematical theory, but the phenomena he investigated are experimentally robust and analyzable within modern optics. Check this out: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357993666_Goethe%27s_Farbenlehre_from_the_Perspective_of_Modern_Physics. Also: https://philpapers.org/archive/MUEPE.pdf?utm
Thank you for pointing out Aristotle's standpoint. I’m not sure why I erroneously associated him with the atomists, as nowhere does the citation indicate that. I’ve included your observation in the post (without permission... ;) …).
I would like to focus more on Goethe's approach, but currently, there’s little time for anything. Years ago, I read the books by Proskauer and Bortoft, but my knowledge remains superficial. Proskauer pointed out that there are aspects of color theory that remain unexplained by modern physics. I can't recall exactly which ones, but if that’s true, it would certainly deserve more attention. However, one must set priorities.
Thank you also for the two articles about Goethe. I will go through them!
Very cool, thank you! — especially the openness toward Goethe’s approach, which is rarely treated sympathetically...
One small historical note: Aristotle did not actually hold a particle theory of light. In De Anima (II.7) he famously defines light as “the actuality of the transparent as transparent.” In other words, light for Aristotle is not a stream of particles traveling through space but the actualized state of a transparent medium such as air or water when illuminated by a luminous body. In that respect his account is closer to a kind of field-like conception than to the atomistic emission theories of Democritus.
On Goethe: the characterization of his color theory as purely qualitative is understandable I think, but recent experimental work has complicated that picture. Physicists such as Matthias Rang and collaborators have reconstructed Goethe’s prism experiments and shown that the boundary spectra Goethe described at light–dark edges correspond to real optical phenomena that can be modeled quantitatively, not only the phenomenal aspect of it. Goethe himself did not develop a mathematical theory, but the phenomena he investigated are experimentally robust and analyzable within modern optics. Check this out: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357993666_Goethe%27s_Farbenlehre_from_the_Perspective_of_Modern_Physics. Also: https://philpapers.org/archive/MUEPE.pdf?utm
Thank you for pointing out Aristotle's standpoint. I’m not sure why I erroneously associated him with the atomists, as nowhere does the citation indicate that. I’ve included your observation in the post (without permission... ;) …).
I would like to focus more on Goethe's approach, but currently, there’s little time for anything. Years ago, I read the books by Proskauer and Bortoft, but my knowledge remains superficial. Proskauer pointed out that there are aspects of color theory that remain unexplained by modern physics. I can't recall exactly which ones, but if that’s true, it would certainly deserve more attention. However, one must set priorities.
Thank you also for the two articles about Goethe. I will go through them!