I'm talking about the color that is inside our heads. I'm not talking about wavelengths.
It seems like any attempt to answer the question 'What is color?' or 'How does brain create color?' must involve referring to 'color' itself.
We've assumed in mainstream science that 'color' must be getting produced in our brain by some complex physical process, and yet we have no clue what that physical process is, or how that process achieves the phenomenon of 'vision'.
Any attempt to explain the origin of color using fundamental ideas like 'forces', 'space', 'charge', 'mass', 'time', etc, is paradoxical. Any complex phenomenon which is explained using those ideas is described by 'movement of particles' or 'flow of energy'. We can explain the phenomenon of planet formation using those ideas (because planet formation involves movement of particles or flow of energy wrt time).
But it's easy to see that 'color' is not one such phenomenon. When we question 'How color gets produced?', we're not asking why some particles move in the way they do. This question is not about movement at all.
In the end, asking 'What is vision?' seems just as complicated as like asking 'What is time?' or 'What is mass?'. These are the things which just are. Physics is about exploring the properties of these fundamental things instead of asking why these things exist.
So I'm saying that solving the mystery of color should involve advancing our understanding of fundamentals of Physics itself. I'm surprised that this is not the popular take on this question, because the phenomenon of 'color' is fundamentally different from any other phenomenon we've explained using the standard models of Physics.