[Mitko Gorgiev (OP)]

These posts have been removed as they contravene both the rules on material published elsewhere and advertising.

[Bored chemist]

Yet another post full of nonsense.
Were you hoping that by starting another thread "part 2" people would forget that you didn't answer the points raised in the first part?

[evan_au]

THE GREATEST HOAX IN THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE!

I think Piltdown Man was a greater hoax.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man

By a hoax, I mean cases where:
- Someone intentionally set out to deceive scientists
...and I exclude cases where:
- Someone produced a theory/hypothesis which became accepted reality due to the lack of a better theory (eg the geocentric theory in ancient Greece)
- Someone made an deduction based on insufficient scientific evidence (eg the Moon goes around the Earth, so all planets and the Sun also go around the Earth)
- Someone misunderstood the scientific evidence (eg the planets go around the Sun in circular orbits)
- Someone produced a theory, which was later found to be an approximation to the real situation, in some limited domain (eg Newton's gravity)
- Someone understood the science, but produced an analogy to explain some aspect of the behavior for beginners (eg Gravity is like a bowling ball on a trampoline)

[Mitko Gorgiev (OP)]

By a hoax, I mean cases where:
- Someone intentionally set out to deceive scientists

By a hoax, I mean cases where:
- Someone intentionally set out to deceive scientists and non-scientists, too.

That's is exactly what was intended with the fraudulent representation of the prismatic colors.
For, if one gives the true representation, then the hoax that light consists of colors becomes obvious.
You say that the Piltdown Man was a greater hoax.
If you ask 100 random people of this world whether they have ever heard of the Piltdown Man, I don't believe that 3 of them will say "yes".
On the other side, if you ask 100 random people whether they have ever seen the triangle with the colors, I believe that 100 of them will say "yes".
And you tell me that the Piltdown Man is a greater hoax?!!! Are you kidding me?

[Bored chemist]

For, if one gives the true representation, then the hoax that light consists of colors becomes obvious.

Can you explain how the monochromators I use at work can do their jobs if your view is right?

In particular, if your earlier comment about orange light was correct, how come I can see it through a (prism) monochromator?
You claimed this

There is no separate orange color in the refracted beam;

but my eyes tell me that you are wrong.

And, since direct observation shows me that you are wrong, I can conclude that you are wrong about the "hoax" because the story in the physics books is actually correct.
(The illustrations may be careless, but the physics is correct)