MOVING TO FRONT FROM JANUARY 28: UPDATED
(Thanks to Phil Gasper for the pointer.)
UPDATE: Philosopher Mark Eli Kalderson (UCL) writes:
Just a quick comment. The discovery of a new blue pigment is not the discovery of a new shade of blue. The former is some material stuff, the latter is a property. This distinction was drawn by Aristotle and the Peripatetic author of De Coloribus (both claim that color mixture is not to be understood on the model of mixing pigments.) So the relevant conceptual distinction has been in place for over two millennia. It remains newsworthy that the first new blue pigment has been discovered in centuries. But a new shade of blue? Fake News!
ANOTHER: Philosopher Mohan Matthen (Toronto) writes:
Mark Kalderon is clearly correct to say that there is a distinction between shades of blue and blue pigments. He’s probably also right to say that YInMN blue is not a new shade.
But (and no doubt this is not what Mark was suggesting) it’s not impossible to discover new shades. Vantablack is a shade of black that had never been seen before. Presumably, it existed in the Platonic world of possibles, but being absorbent beyond any pigment or natural substance ever seen before, it was indeed a new shade, at least as far as colours realized on this planet go. It’s possible that YInMn blue is new in this sense. It’s supposed to be extremely brilliant.
I'll open this for further comments from philosophers and others knowledgeable about the metaphysics and science of color. Signed comments (full name, valid e-mail, which will not appear) will be strongly preferred.
