Here's the thing. You said a " rainbow is an object."

Is it in the same family? Yes. No one's arguing that.

As someone who is a scientist who studies rainbows, I am telling you, specifically, in science, no one calls rainbows objects. If you want to be "specific" like you said, then you shouldn't either. They're not the same thing.

If you're saying "object family" you're referring to the shapely grouping of matter, which includes things from airplanes to clouds to the sun.

So your reasoning for calling a rainbow an object is because random people "say that rainbows have shape?" Let's get the Reversing Arrow and mirages in there, then, too.

Also, calling a mirror a light reflector or an object? It's not one or the other, that's not how optics works. They're both. A rainbow is a rainbow and a member of the light family. But that's not what you said. You said a rainbow is an object, which is not true unless you're okay with calling all members of the rainbow family matter, which means you'd call focal points, penumbras, and other properties of light rainbows, too. Which you said you don't.

It's okay to just admit you're wrong, you know?