I would like to see a better reply to this comment. Why doesn't this address the problem of Color from the OP? Is it because the jump from wavelength to the label of "Blue" hasn't been defined?

From the OP:

So if you intend to tell me that reality consists solely of physics, mathematics, or computation, you need to tell me where the colors are.

I'm not trying to be tricksy or smart. I am trying to understand the question and why the above isn't an answer. In essence, all confusion would be lifted if you replaced the words "red" and "green" with something else in the following paragraph:

Whether your physics consists of fields and particles in space, or [...] whatever - I don't see anything red or green there, and yet I do see it right now, here in reality.

As in,

Whether your physics consists of fields and particles in space, or [...] whatever - I don't see anything {word A} or {word B} there, and yet I do see {word C} right now, here in reality.

Words A, B, and C all belong to some category and that category is not "seen" in physics but is "seen" in reality. Thomblake is trying to use "wavelengths":

Whether your physics consists of fields and particles in space, or [...] whatever - I don't see [any wavelengths] there, and yet I do see [wavelengths] right now, here in reality.

This makes no sense to me, so something must be wrong in my translations. What is it?