Experiments and Considerations Touching Colours (1664) by Robert Boyle
page 76 of 285 (26%)
page 76 of 285 (26%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
Nature of the Body is Alter'd, but only that the Disposition of its Parts
in reference to the Incident Light is Chang'd, why may not the Whiteness be accounted Emphatical too, which I shall shew anon to be Producible, barely by such another change in Black Horn? and yet this so easily acquir'd Whiteness seems to be as truly its Colour as the Blackness was before, and at least is more Permanent than the Greenness of Leaves, the Redness of Roses, and, in short, than the Genuine Colours of the most part of Nature's Productions. It may indeed be further Objected, that according as the Sun or other Luminous Body changes place, these Emphatical Colours alter or vanish. But not to repeat what I have just now said, I shall add, that if a piece of Cloath in a Drapers Shop (in such the Light being seldome Primary) be variously Folded, it will appear of differing Colours, as the Parts happen to be more Illuminated or more Shaded, and if you stretch it Flat, it will commonly exhibit some one Uniform Colour, and yet these are not wont to be reputed Emphatical, so that the Difference seems to be chiefly this, that in the Case of the Rain-bow, and the like, the Position of the Luminary Varies the Colour, and in the Cloath I have been mentioning, the Position of the Object does it. Nor am I forward to allow that in all Cases the Apparition of Emphatical Colours requires a Determinate position of the Eye, for if Men will have the Whiteness of Froth Emphatical, you know what we have already Inferr'd from thence. Besides, the Sun-beams trajected through a Triangular Glass, after the manner lately mention'd, will, upon the Body that Terminates them, Paint a Rain-bow, that may be seen whether the Eye be plac'd on the Right Hand of it or the Left, or Above or Beneath it, or Before or Behind it; and though there may appear some Little Variation in the Colours of the Rain-bow, beheld from Differing parts of the Room, yet such a Diversity may be also observ'd by an Attentive Eye in Real Colours, look'd upon under the like Circumstances, Nor will it follow, that because there remains no Footsteps of the Colour upon the Object, when the Prism is Remov'd, that therefore the Colour was not Real, since the |
|