Thank you for your post.
It was the color red I use but unimportant. But I think you missed something in the use of my color illustration, perhaps it is my writting style or lack of, I would like to clarify useing your illustration. While both drivers will be in agreement that the light is green(assuming both are not color blind) and use it as a signal to go, but it in no way is this proof that the visual sensation experienced in the 2 seperate minds is the same, it may well be, but since color does not really exist concretely in light and is only a mind interpetation.
My illustration was actually not inspired by your own comment on color, as this argument ( what I may describe as a color may not be your perception of it ) is a philosphical argument that has been discussed for well over 100 years. I used it to try to illustrate that though using language to to describe such enormous concepts, as Narkissos noted, is a little like trying to perform brain surgey with a Black and Decker drill, there is a commonality of use that helps us to understand the boundaries of the concepts that we are discussing.
Science, philosophy, mysticism and religion all have different definitions and though their boundaries may sometimes overlap slightly the commonality of usage and understanding best helps us understand important elements of this whole subject.
I have no issue with the scientific concept of quantum physics, I have no issue with the philosophic concepts of quantum physics, but I do have issues with the mystic and religious elements injected into it. Imho, at that stage the concepts of quantum physics become imbued with a 'human' element that cannot be sustained by the scientific and philosophic elements previously noted.
I hope the above makes sense, as this is a huge subject.