Black is the absence of light because it absorbs light, but when we create black paint or black objects, light is always reflected, either in all directions in matte or smoothly in shiny black objects, making it never a true black. Would it be possible to use polarization to create an object that does not reflect any light, creating a truly black substance, without any shadows or reflection of light?
[Physics] Is true black possible
opticspolarizationreflectionrefractionvisible-light
Related Solutions
After appending my 2019-04-30 update to my much older answer, the above excellent, to-the-point and from-the-trenches expert answer came in. I immediately changed the designated answer from mine to the new one. There's probably still some fun reading below in my old reply and update, though... :)
Alas, I must answer my own question: I found a very explicit example online description of someone who created a thick-film transmission hologram of a convex mirror. She (or he) describes seeing her own face clearly, even if only in monochrome. So, if I accept this description at face value, it clearly is possible to create a realistic mirror using only wave-exclusion diffraction effects. Cool!
Also, I am amused (or is it chagrined?) that this reminded me of the importance of reading long articles all the way to the end, even if you feel you already got the point. This description of an actual holographic mirror was hidden at the very end of the long posting on I mentioned in my question about how transmission holograms cannot form mirrors.
2019-04-30 Update
As noted in the comments below, the above link to an explicit description of a holographic mirror unfortunately is no longer available, not even in Internet archives.
However, this draft book chapter PDF on reflection using Denisyuk transmission holograms seems to provide pretty good coverage of the issues.
Still, as I get older I find I like finding the simplest possible explanations of things. The simplest proof that true holograhic mirrors can exist is this: You can see your own face in a pool of calm water.
Why? Well, the reason why thick film holograms can reflect light at all is because any change in refractive index in a transparent medium creates an amplitude -- a probability -- for light to be reflected back in the direction in which it came. Metal mirrors are just extreme examples of this effect, since the Fermi surface electrons in metals create a nearly 100% probability that photons will be reflected.
The quantum mechanical details of reflections works in transparent materials are covered delightfully in my favorite Richard Feynman book, QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter. In addition to its relevance here for understanding what is possible with holograms, I recommend QED strongly to anyone interested in understanding just how utterly and completely weird quantum mechanics really is.
Feynman discusses how properly space layers of changes in refractive index can create a surface that, at least for certain frequencies, has a nearly 100% probability of reflecting light. A holographic mirror!
Finally, take a contemplative look at this image (or a real example from your kitchen) of a roll of very layers of Mylar film:
Nearly everyone has at sometime noticed at some level of consciousness how remarkably metallic such rolls look, almost like aluminum foil. That is because even though the distances between the film layers are not wave-coherent as they would in a photographic hologram, they do collectively reflect more and more light, until the surface looks remarkably metallic... which is to say, remarkably like a mirror.
Such a roll of Mylar film thus can plausibly be construed as a crude mechanically constructed hologram, and thus a proof that at least at some level of quality, transparent materials can indeed be configured to create plausibly effective, metallic-looking reflective mirrors.
You are confusing additive and subtractive colour mixing. If you mix paints together you should get black, not white.
In additive mixing (as used in TVs and monitors), you create light, which is then mixed. When you mix the three primary colours (red, green and blue), you produce white. Other mixes produce other colours, for example red and green combine to produce yellow.
When you use paints, you are using an external light source (the sun or a light bulb) and each paint reflects some of the wavelengths and absorbs others. For example, yellow paint absorbs the blue wavelengths, leaving red and green, which mix to yellow. This is called subtractive mixing, and the primaries are cyan, magenta and yellow; when you mix paints of these colours, the result is black. Adding additional colours to this mix keeps the result black, as there is no more light to reflect. Other colours are made up by mixing the primaries.
With both additive and subtractive mixing, the result of mixing colours depends on the purity of the primaries. No paints are "perfect" cyan, magenta or yellow, and as a result the mix will not be completely black. You may get a dark brown or purple, depending on the paints you use. This is one (of several) reasons why printers use black as well as CMY.
The same goes for monitors: you never get "pure white" - which is typically defined as light with a colour temperature of 5500K, about the same as sunlight. Some monitors can be set for different temperatures. Some are set to 9000K, giving white a bluish cast. Interestingly, the colours that can be displayed on a monitor do not match those of a printer (or paint). A monitor can display colours that a printer cannot print, and vice versa. Every device has its own colour gamut, usually smaller than the eye's gamut, so with any device there are colours we can see but which the device cannot produce.
The reason why all this mixing occurs is because our retina has sensors for red, green and blue, and the brain mixes these inputs to tell us what colour we are seeing. This is why the primaries are RGB, or CMY.
Best Answer
The problem with the suggestion of using polarization is that you now have the reflections off the polarizers to contend with.
I think the short answer is "it depends on how 'black' you want it to be". "Truly black" = reflectance of 0. I am quite sure that is impossible - there will always be some probability of light scattering off a surface. All you can do is make that probability "quite small".
The world record for "blackness" appears to be held currently by Ventablack, a material with a special surface structure (nanotubes) that traps incident photons, and reflects less than 0.04 % of incident light. That is indeed very nearly black (but nowhere near "perfect"). Just look at this picture to get a sense of just how black that is. Of course if most cameras have 12 bit sensors, then one LSB is 1 part in 4000 - and 0.04% is 1 part in 2500. So indeed, this is almost invisibly black for a typical camera. Uncanny.
(Image from the above linked source).