I think this questions are off topic (they might fit in CogSci).
The first asks if brightness is physichological, which of course is true.
Is light brightness subjective or can it be quantified?
The second asks about time perception.
I think this questions are off topic (they might fit in CogSci).
The first asks if brightness is physichological, which of course is true.
Is light brightness subjective or can it be quantified?
The second asks about time perception.
Subjective questions are closed; but neither of these are subjective. The first is a terminology question (it's phrased badly but I guess it could pass).
The second is a physics question, though some of the answers are biological.
I'm always uneasy when these types of question get closed. The problem is that for us, as experienced physicists, it's obvious that they have a strong subjective element - but for a novice this isn't obvious at all, and so it seems to the OP as if they are asking a physics question.
For this reason I think the correct thing to do is to write an answer explaining the specific reasons why the phenomenon in question has more to do with biology and perception than with physics. A good answer along these lines will be helpful to other physics novices as well, and hence it's a constructive thing to have on the site.