Home > Image Theory, Other Blogs > A Scientific Approach to Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin

A Scientific Approach to Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin

November 7, 2011

imageIt is a wonderful, relatively new blog. I’m just starting to explore it. There is a problem: it’s in Italian and I don’t read Italian. But Google does a reasonable job of translation and the Chrome browser makes it automatic.

With a picture of my favorite philosopher, Richard Swinburne, in the masthead I was hooked before reading a word. Having read some, I am now doubly hooked.

There is a wonderful article, “A Scientific Approach to Image Formation of the Shroud (first part)” (second part) by Paul Di Lazzaro. Here is the introductory biographical sketch because it warrants attention:

With this article we’ll start the collaboration with  Paul Di Lazzaro , a physicist and director of research at the Research Centre ENEA Frascati, winner of the Italian Physical Society in 1990 and 2008 Award of Excellence in Enea. And ‘the author of over 195 articles published in international journals and 6 patents for industrial inventions. Member of several international committees, is currently considered one of the leading European experts in the field of high power laser systems and their applications in micro-electronics, plasma generation, selective and superficial cleaning materials, biology, light-matter interaction. Since 2005 he has been interested in scientific studies on the image on the Shroud of Turin, coordinating different experiments in coloring-like shroud of linen fabrics irradiated with excimer lasers, and working as Chairman of the International Workshop on the approach to scientific images acheropite held at the Center ENEA Frascati Research 4 to 6 May 2010. By Dr. Lazarus has made ​​available to answer any questions that may be posted in the comments below the article.

Note that there are 194 good comments to part I of this article. Read them after you read the full article. This comment from someone named Jack could have been from me:

I can not wait to read the second part, which will set out the results … however, I would ask you, Dr. Lazarus, what do you think of the American Chemical studies of Rogers that the image appeared due to specific chemical reactions and claims to have obtained the same type of yellowing on the Shroud … here it is: http://shroud.com/pdfs / rogers2.pdf

And then there is this from Part II:

. . . Our main purpose is to perform accurate experiments, controlled and reproducible, suitable to understand the details of the physical and chemical mechanisms that have produced the Shroud image, thanks to a powerful and versatile instrument such as the excimer laser. In this sense, our experimental data can be helpful to scholars who seek to color the linen experiments involving VUV light but are difficult to control, reproduce and characterize such corona discharges [Fanti 2010b] or electrostatic discharge and radon released during seismic events [de Liso].

We are not the conclusion, we are composing pieces of a fascinating and complex scientific puzzle. The enigma of the image of the Shroud of Turin is still "a challenge to intelligence" [John Paul II].

And there are 241 comments to part II.

So here are the links again:

Part I   Part II

I highly recommend using Chrome for translations but you can translate from Firefox and Explorer using toolbar options (it is actually easier to install Chrome for translations – and its is so superior for PDF files that it is worth it).

 

A Google translation of part I is below the fold.

Complete Google Translation from UCCR Online Article:

The front and back image of the corpse of a man who was scourged and crucified, barely visible on the linen cloth of the Shroud of Turin (see Figure 1) presents physical and chemical characteristics that make it so special now impossible to get the same color, as discussed in the following articles in the bibliography: Culliton, Gilbert, Jumper, Pellicori, Accept, Morris Heller, Schwalbe, Jumper 1984, Mc Crone, Jackson 1984, Jackson 1990, 2002 Fanti, Ferrero, Fanti 2004, the 2010th Fanti, 2010b Fanti, Fanti 2010C , Garlaschelli Heimburger.

Figure 1. Photograph of the Shroud of Turin (from the site www.sindone.org ) and its negative B / W obtained by software Jasc Paint Shop Pro7. The size of the shroud is about 441 cm in length and 113 cm in width. The discovery that the image behaves like a photographic negative was made ​​by S. Pia in 1898, attracting the interest of scientists interested in understanding the origin of this singular image [Falcinelli].

The failure to replicate (and therefore falsify) the image on the Shroud of formulating a hypothesis reliably prevents the formation mechanism of the impression and then to explain how body image is formed on the Shroud. As a partial justification, the scientists complain about the impossibility of making direct measurements on the Shroud cloth. In fact, the latest experimental analysis of in situ physical and chemical properties of the body image of the Shroud dates back to 1978 when a group of 31 scientists under the aegis of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) obtained permission to make direct measurements Shroud on the sheet. Scientists use modern equipment for the time, made available by several manufacturers for a market value of two and a half million dollars, and made a number of non-destructive measurements of infrared spectroscopy, visible and ultraviolet, X-ray fluorescence , thermography, pyrolysis, mass spectrometry, micro-Raman analysis, photograph transmission microscopy, removal of fibrils and microchemical tests. The results of measurements STURP were published in various scientific journals, see the articles by Gilbert, Pellicori, Accept, Morris Heller, Schwalbe, 1980 Jumper, Jumper 1984.

The analysis performed on the Shroud did not find significant amounts of pigments (dyes, paints) or traces of designs.Based on the results of dozens of measurements, the researchers concluded that the STURP body image is painted or printed, or obtained by heating. In addition, the color of the image resides on the outer surface of the fibrils and making up the threads of the cloth, and recent measurements of fragments of the Shroud [Fanti 2010C] show that the thickness of staining is extremely thin, amounting to about 200 nm (1 nm = 10 -9 m = one billionth of a meter), or a fifth of a thousandth of a millimeter, corresponding to the thickness of the primary cell wall of the so-called single linen fiber. Recall that a single linen thread is made ​​up of about 200 fibrils.

Other important information derived from the results of STURP measures are as follows:

a) The blood is human, and there is no image beneath the bloodstains [Heller, Jumper 1984];

b) The degree of color of the body contains three-dimensional information [Jackson 1984];

c) The fibrils colored (image) are more fragile than unstained fibrils.

d) The coloration of the surface fibrils of the image comes from an unknown process which resulted in oxidation, dehydration and conjugation of the structure of the flax [Heller]. In other words, the color is a result of a process of accelerated aging of linen [Jumper 1984].

As already mentioned, until now all attempts to reproduce an image having the same characteristics have
failed. Some researchers have obtained images with a similar appearance to the image of the Shroud (see for example articles Pellicori, Ferrero, 2010b Fanti, Garlaschelli) but nobody has been able to reproduce simultaneously all microscopic and macroscopic characteristics. In this sense, the origin of the Shroud image is still unknown. This seems to be the core of the so-called "mystery of the Shroud" Shroud of the sheet regardless of age, which is medieval (1260-1390) as shown in the controversial radiocarbon dating [Damon Van Haelst] or older as a result of other investigations [Rogers], and regardless of the true extent of the controversial historical documents on the existence of the Shroud in the years preceding 1260 [Nicolotti, Plain, Scavone], the "question of questions" remain the same: as the body image was generated Shroud?

The ‘Radiative HYPOTHESIS
The results of measurements STURP briefly summarized in the previous section have important implications in the search and selection of possible mechanisms of image formation. Let’s list some of these consequences.

  • There are at least two modes of deposition of the Shroud cloth around the corpse placed above and below (not in full contact with the whole body stiffened by rigor mortis) or pressed on the body and tied in order to have a contact with almost the entire body surface . The first mode is compatible with the precise relationship between the intensity (gradient) image and the distance between body and cloth. In addition, the image is also present in areas of the body not in contact with the cloth, for example around the hands and around the tip of the nose. The second mode is less likely, because they are absent from the typical geometric deformation of a body in three dimensions on a sheet brought into contact in two dimensions [Jackson 1984]. Consequently, we can deduce that the image is not formed by direct contact with the body of the flax . This consideration, coupled with extreme superficiality and lack of color pigment, making it extremely unlikely to get a picture-like shroud in contact with chemical methods, both in a modern laboratory (see the articles Garlaschelli and Heimburger), and a fortiori by a hypothetical medieval forger.

  • Beneath the stains of blood is no image. This means that the traces of blood have been filed before the image [Heller]. So the image formed at a later deposition of the corpse . In addition, all the blood stains have well-defined edges, smudge, and this observation is consistent with the hypothesis that the corpse was removed from the sheet

  • Insufficient signs of rot at the orifices, which occur about 40 hours after death. Consequently, the image does not depend on the gases of putrefaction and certainly not the corpse remained in the sheet for more than two days

In the search for a mechanism of image formation that satisfies all the conditions posed by these experimental observations, some articles (see, eg, Jackson 1984, Jackson 1990) have suggested that a form of electromagnetic energy (eg, a short flash of light wavelength) incident on a linen cloth to suit the requirements could have played some of the most peculiar features of the Shroud image, such as superficial staining, the degree of color and the absence of pigment on the cloth, not can be obtained by chemical methods.

The first attempts to reproduce the Shroud face used a laser radiation by CO 2 , which emits infrared light (wavelength λ = 10.6 mM, where 1 micron = one millionth of a meter) and have produced an image on a fabric similar to linen first glance, the footprint of the Shroud face [Ferrero]. However, microscopic analysis showed a staining was too deep and many charred linen threads, features incompatible with the Shroud image. One of the causes of the charring of the wires observed by Ferrero is the wavelength of the infrared radiation emitted by the laser CO 2 . In fact, the radiation at λ = 10.6 μm excites the vibrational energy levels of the irradiated material, resulting in the release of thermal energy that heats instantly radiated area of fine linen carbonized. On the contrary, it is known that the energy carried by short wavelength radiation (ultraviolet and far ultraviolet) works directly with the chemical bonds of the material irradiated, without heating the material. In addition, all non-metallic materials, including flax, have an absorption which increases with decreasing wavelength of the radiation, and consequently, the smaller the wavelength of the radiation, the thinner the thickness of the material that absorbs same radiation.

With these premises in 2005, we considered the ultraviolet (UV) as a candidate able to get two of the main features of the Shroud image, or a thin thickness and a color image-forming process at low temperature. We first irradiated with two laser linen fabrics excimer XeCl (wavelength λ = 0.308 emission mM, ie 34 times less than that of the laser experiment Ferrero) emitting pulses of different durations, respectively 120 and 33 nanoseconds nanoseconds at half maximum (remember that a 1 ns = nanosecond = one billionth of a second). The results of these experiments are described in Articles 2006 Canopies, Canopies 2008, Di Lazzaro 2009th. The analysis of results suggested to us that to obtain a coloration similar to that of the Shroud would have had to use a radiation wavelength even shorter, in the far ultraviolet spectrum. Our choice was to use the excimer laser that emits pulses ARF λ = 0.193 μm, and the results (articles published in The Lazarus 2009b, Di Lazzaro 2010th, 2010b Di Lazzaro Di Lazzaro 2010C, Di Lazzaro 2010d) will be described in the second part of this contribution.

REFERENCES

Accept, J., J. Baumgart: "Infrared reflectance spectroscopy and thermographic Investigations of the Shroud of Turin,"Applied Optics 19, 1921-1929 (1980).

G. canopies, P. Lazarus, D. Murra, G. Fanti: "Coloration of fabrics of linen with the excimer laser and comparison with the image on the Shroud," Technical Report RT/2006/70/FIM ENEA (2006).

G. canopies, P. Lazarus, D. Murra, G. Fanti: "Coloring linens with excimer lasers to simulate the body image of the Turin Shroud," Applied Optics 47, 1278-1285 (2008).

Culliton B.: "The Mystery of the Shroud challenges 20th-century science," Science 201, 235-239 (1978).

P. Damon, D. Donahue, B. Gore, A. Hatheway, A. Jull, T. Linick, P. Sercel, L. Toolin, C. Bronk, E. Hall, R. Hedges, R.Housley, I. Law, C. Perry, G. Bonani, S. Trumbore, W. Woelfli, J. Ambers, S. Bowman, M. Leese, M. Tite: "Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin," Nature 337, 611-615 (1989).

P. Di Lazzaro, G. Canopies, G. Fanti, D. Murra, A. Santoni: "Colouring fabrics with excimer lasers to simulate encoded images: The Case of the Shroud of Turin" Proceedings SPIE Vol. 7131 (2009a) pp. 71311R 71311R-6-1-.

P. Di Lazzaro, G. Canopies, G. Fanti, D. Murra, E. Nichelatti, A. Santoni: "A physical hypothesis on the origin of the body image embedded into the Turin Shroud," Proceedings of the International Conference on The Shroud of Turin: Perspectives on a multifaceted Enigma, edited by G. Fanti (Editions Library Project Padua 2009b) pp. 116-125,www.ohioshroudconference.com/papers/p01.pdf

P. Di Lazzaro, D. Murra, A. Santoni, G. Canopies: "Sub-micrometer depth of coloration by vacuum ultraviolet radiation linens" , Proceedings of the International Workshop on the Scientific approach to the acheiropoietos Images, IWSA, edited by P. Lazarus (ENEA, 2010a) pp. 3-10. ISBN 978-88-8286-232-9, available on networks www.acheiropoietos.info / Proceedings / proceedings.php

P. Di Lazzaro, D. Murra, A. Santoni, G. Fanti, E. Nichelatti, G. Canopies: "Deep Ultraviolet radiation simulates the Turin Shroud image" J. of Imaging Science Technology 54, 040302-040302 (06) (2010b).

P. Di Lazzaro: "scientific hypotheses on the formation of the image of the Shroud" 30Days, No 4 (April 2010C), pp.. 72-75. A summary is available at http://www.30giorni.it/articoli_id_22507_l1.htm?id=22507

Lazarus P.: "From the results of ENEA researchers experimented with the excimer laser for reproduction in the laboratory of an image similar to the Shroud of Turin" (2010d). Interview available athttp://titano.sede.enea.it/Stampa/skin2col.php?page=eneaperdettagliofigli&id=166

R. Falcinelli: "Two unpublished letters of Secondo Pia about the 1898 Shroud photography" , Proceedings of the International Workshop on the Scientific approach to the acheiropoietos Images, IWSA, edited by P. Lazarus, published by ENEA (2010) pp. 123 to 128. ISBN 978-88-8286-232-9, available on networks www.acheiropoietos.info / Proceedings / proceedings.php

G. Fanti, M. Moroni: "Comparison of Luminance Between Face of Turin Shroud Man and experimental results" J. Imaging Science Technology 46, 142-154 (2002).

G. Fanti, R. Maggiolo: "The double superficiality of the frontal image of the Turin Shroud," J. Opt. A 6, 491-503 (2004).

G. Fanti, J. Botella, F. Crosilla, F. Lattarulo, N. Svensson, R. Schneider, A. Wanger: "List of Evidences of the Turin Shroud," Proceedings of the ‘International Workshop on the Scientific approach to the acheiropoietos Images, IWSA, edited by P. Lazarus (ENEA, 2010a) pp. 67-75. ISBN 978-88-8286-232-9, available on networks www.acheiropoietos.info / Proceedings / proceedings.php

G. Fanti, "Corona Discharge Can explain the body image of the Turin Shroud?" J. Imaging Science Technology 54 020508-020508-11 (2010b).

G. Fanti, J. Botella, P. Lazarus, R. Schneider, N. Svensson: "Microscopic and macroscopic Characteristics of the Shroud of Turin image superficiality" J. Imaging Sci Technol. 54, 040201-040201 (8) (2010C).

F. Ferrero, F. Testore, C. Tonin, R. Innocent: "Surface degradation of linen textiles induced by laser treatment" AUTEX Research Journal 2, 109-114 (2002).

Garlaschelli L.: "Life-Size Reproduction of the Shroud of Turin and Its Image," J. Imaging Science Technology 54, 040301-040301 (14) (2010).

R. Gilbert, M. Gilbert: "Ultraviolet visible reflectance and fluorescence spectra of the Shroud of Turin," Applied Optics 19, 1930-1936 (1980).

Heimburger T., G. Fanti: "A scientific comparison Between the Turin Shroud and the whole first handmade copy"Proceedings of the International Workshop on the Scientific approach to the acheiropoietos Images, IWSA, edited by P.Lazarus (ENEA, 2010) pp.. 19-28. ISBN 978-88-8286-232-9, available on networks www.acheiropoietos.info / Proceedings / proceedings.php

J. Heller, A. Adler: "A chemical investigation of the Shroud of Turin" Can. Forens Soc. Sci J. 14, 81-103 (1981).

J. Jackson, E. Jumper, W. Ercolini: "Correlation of image intensity on the Turin Shroud with the 3-D structure of a human body shape" Applied Optics 23, 2244-2270 (1984).

J. Jackson: "Is the image on the Shroud in two to process heretofore unknown to modern science?" Shroud Spectrum International, 34, 3-29 (1990).

E. Jumper, W. Mottern: "Scientific Investigation of the Shroud of Turin," Applied Optics 19, 1909-1912 (1980).

Jumper, E. A. Adler, J. Jackson, S. Pellicori, J. Heller, and J. Druzik, "A comprehensive examination of the Various Stains and Images on the Shroud of Turin" , Archaeological Chemistry III: ACS Advances in Chemistry 205, published daJ.B. Lambert (American Chemical Society, Washington, 1984), pp.. 447-476.

WC Mc Crone: "The Shroud image" The Microscope 48, 79-85 (2000).

R. Morris, L. Schwalbe, JR London: "X-ray fluorescence investigation on the Shroud of Turin" X-Ray Spectrometry 9, 40-47 (1980).

Nicolotti A.: "The Templars and the Shroud. Story of a false " (Salerno., Rome 2011).

Pellicori S.: "Spectral properties of the Shroud of Turin," Applied Optics 19, 1913-1920 (1980).

A. Plain: "Missing Years of the Holy Shroud," Proceedings of the International Workshop on the Scientific approach to the acheiropoietos Images, IWSA 2010, edited by P. Lazarus, (ENEA 2010) pp.. 95-102. ISBN 978-88-8286-232-9, available on networks www.acheiropoietos.info / Proceedings / proceedings.php

Rogers, A.: "Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the Shroud of Turin" Thermochimica Acta 425, 189-194 (2005).

Scavone D.: "Documenting the Shroud’s Missing Years" , Proceedings of the International Workshop on the Scientific approach to the acheiropoietos Images, IWSA 2010, edited by P. Lazarus, (ENEA 2010) pp.. 87-94. ISBN 978-88-8286-232-9, available on networks www.acheiropoietos.info / Proceedings / proceedings.php

L. Schwalbe, R. Rogers: "Physics and chemistry of the Shroud of Turin, a summary of the 1978 Investigation," Analytica Chimica Acta 135, 3-49 (1982).

Van Haelst A.: "A critical review of the radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin" Proceedings of the International Workshop on the Scientific approach to the acheiropoietos Images, IWSA, edited by P. Lazarus, (ENEA 2010) pp.. 267-273. ISBN 978-88-8286-232-9, available on-line at www.acheiropoietos.info / Proceedings / proceedings.php

Share on:

  • Aggiungi su Facebook
  • Aggiungi su OKNOtizie
  • Aggiungi su Twitter
  • Aggiungi su Windows Live
  • Aggiungi su MySpace

Related News

194 comments on a scientific approach to image formation of the Shroud (first part)
  1. Manuela said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 13:40

    Firstly a very warm "welcome" to dr. Lazarus, I followed his work with passion on the Shroud Enea and now I want to take some time to study all the literature cited.

  2. Richard said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 13:42

    A truly superb article, compliments of Dr. Lazarus!

  3. Renato Valsecchi said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 13:47

    Well … it is already possible to read a scientific approach to the Shroud is so rare … also have the opportunity to ask questions to the author do not think has ever happened in a blog … but now … I would have 100 for the third time I reread the article and I try to pull out of a maximum of 3%, I promise!

  4. Jack said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 14:14

    I can not wait to read the second part, which will set out the results … however, I would ask you, Dr. Lazarus, what do you think of the American Chemical studies of Rogers that the image appeared due to specific chemical reactions and claims to have obtained the same type of yellowing on the Shroud … here it is: http://shroud.com/pdfs / rogers2.pdf

    • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

      October 20th, 2011 at 16:54

      Thank you Jack for this question, because it allows me to speak of a great scientist, Ray Rogershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Rogers .
      It was one of the older members of the group STURP, when 51 years participated in the extraordinary five-day adventure in the Royal Palace, which has provided so much information on the uniqueness of the Shroud image. (And here I venture to open a small parenthesis: if today you were to create a new team of specialists, a STURP 2, what would the average age? STURP In 1978 was about 30 years. Today in Italy 30 years in the majority graduate of the population does precarious.)
      Chemical highly experienced specialist in thermochemical processes, in my opinion was (along with physicist John Jackson), the scientist who provided the greatest contribution to the understanding of the Shroud image.
      Rogers started from a assumed to be a challenge: to explain the origin of the Shroud with a natural chemical phenomena.And consequently discarded a priori assumptions radiative, which requires a source of light or particles difficult to postulate scientifically who provided lì’energia radiation? A miracle? The resurrection? A scientist can not accept these assumptions lightly.
      A second aside: there was an interesting scientific discussion between Rogers and Jackson in 1990 on the assumption radiant, if you are interested I can try to summarize the terms of the dispute and give you references.
      As a scientist, I totally understand the point of view of Rogers, and I feel empathy with his approach.
      Unfortunately, no phenomenon or chemical method is effective to obtain experimentally and similsindonica surface staining.even the Maillard reaction (proposed by Rogers in the article that you cited) succeeds. among other things, the Maillard reaction involves the interaction of an amino acid with impurities and with a thin film of sugars (carbohydrates), that Rogers had found on the surface of the fibrils Shroud. In fact, shortly after his death it became clear that the film of carbohydrates found by Rogers on the fibrils of the Shroud was the thin primary cell wall that surrounds the linen fibers (consisting of hemicellulose) degraded by unknown mechanism of coloration and by ‘ age. In fact, both the hemicellulose and cellulose are made ​​up of long chains of carbohydrates that, when broken by an external agent (in nature occurs with the digestive enzymes in ruminants) is transformed into carbohydrates, ie sugars. But it is likely that when there was staining of the Shroud, the unknown external agent has interacted with a new linen, and then with the primary wall hemicellulose of the linen fibers.

      • Panthom said:

        October 20th, 2011 at 17:17

        Among other things it seems to me that John Jackson has played a leading role to repudiate that work very "pious" of cicappino Garlaschelli …

      • Gian Marco Rinaldi said:

        October 22, 2011 at 15:27

        I’d be interested to know something more about what you write in this
        sentence: "In fact, shortly after his death [Rogers] it was realized that
        the film of carbohydrates found by Rogers on the fibrils of the Shroud
        was the thin primary cell wall surrounding the fibrils of
        flax … "It could provide a bibliographic reference? Thank you.

        • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

          October 23, 2011 at 10:59

          Professor Rinaldi, who leggeela pleasure in this blog! I know his work on the C14 dating of the Shroud, and I was surprised not to find a contribution / interview at the recent documentary "The night of the Shroud," which analyzes documents and written statements of the protagonists, which enables the reconstruction of events, maneuvering behind the scenes (not all known) examination of the controversial radiocarbon. Is there some reason that has prevented it from giving a contribution?
          I come to his civil question. The first reference in which you elaborate on this theme (vs. primary cell wall. Film carbohydrates and impurities of Rogers, who called it "ghost") is in reference Fanti 2010C article that this blog generates.
          More generally, the findings of ‘Fanti 2010C article on this subject are derived from a broader discussion within the Shroud Science Group, with the (decisive, in my opinion) advice of Dr. L. Thygesen (seehttp://www.acheiropoietos.info/proceedings/ThygesenWeb.pdf )

          • Gian Marco Rinaldi said:

            October 23, 2011 at 15:03

            Thank you, Di Lazzaro, for the information. As for the documentary, Francesca Saracino, I had not been contacted by the production (nor do I expect to be). I saw a network news about the premiere in Rome last September 28 but I could not come. I saw a trailer for five minutes, from which it is expected that the documentary is really interesting. I suppose that will be broadcast by RAI, but I do not know when it will be. To my knowledge, is already available for personal purchase. So I look forward.

  5. Forastiere Michael said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 14:16

    Thank you, dear Professor. Lazarus, for this dense article – that deserves to be studied very carefully – especially welcome on this site!
    A cordial greeting
    PS: I can not wait for the results of exposure to 193 nm all’eccimero … if, as I imagine and hope, coloring approssimerà more than the Holy Shroud, it means we have taken an important step toward understanding (physically) the mechanism of image formation. If not, moreover, mean that the mystery of the Shroud is even deeper than you might imagine!
    PPS: I let the trivial: nothing but the "trick" of Garlaschelli …

  6. Peter said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 14:21

    How much bet that since there are now many experts are able to refute the matter, our dear friend Juliet WILL NOT ‘SEE ?;)

  7. Hector said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 14:25

    It seems to me that the critical assumption radiative (also supported by Lombatto I think) is the inability to explain the microscopic features of the image, or anyone who would expect that if that were the case the radiation would be wedged in orthogonal disappearing deeper Shroud and instead only the surface fibers are colored, without notice any fade out.

    • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

      October 20th, 2011 at 17:05

      There is radiation and radiation. What writes Hector has been observed with infrared light, as I tried to explain in the article.The infrared light interacts with the linen, generates heat that penetrates deep tissue and produces effects (and color) of any fabric. This is not compatible with the extreme shallowness of the color of the Shroud image. And ‘for this reason that we chose to irradiate linen with short pulses of ultraviolet light. In the second part of the article you may enjoy if and to what extent we succeeded.

  8. GiuliaM said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 14:39

    It ‘already a bit’ that does not feel he could not bear gufare, Piero …

  9. Leonardo Minniti Paul said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 14:56

    Welcome also from me! It ‘a pleasure to enjoy his writing ..

  10. Richard said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 15:06

    I can not wait to read the second part!

  11. Panthom said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 15:20

    But it is unlikely to get a picture-like shroud in contact with chemical methods in a modern laboratory and even more so by a hypothetical medieval forger … I think that the answers can not be then a lot, right? I mean … I understand the critics who are they? how to explain the formation of the image?

    • Michael said:

      October 20th, 2011 at 15:33

      Well, there are those who propose "alien intervention" huh, unfortunately, the issue is not simple.

      • Ֆրանչեսկո որդի ամպրոպի said:

        October 20th, 2011 at 15:36

        and of course an alien intervention, in the absence of incontrovertible evidence of existence of life outside itelligente terresre would be much more rational than divine. Remarkable.

        • Michael said:

          October 20th, 2011 at 16:06

          Unfortunately it is not easy nor deny the absolute madness, let alone prove the truth.
          Provided that the Shroud is what we think, for now we can only speculate, after all, even in the Vatican are very skeptical

          • Gabry said:

            October 20th, 2011 at 16:15

            Skeptics? You say that based on what?

            • Michael said:

              October 20th, 2011 at 16:55

              I think the fact that you have never even tried to give it a try un’ufficialità already, and it’s okay: you can not formalize relics or miracles without a certainty (if not absolute, that it is practically impossible.)
              Anyway, I am confident for charity, would be conclusive proof of the existence of Christ, and much more …

              • Gabry said:

                October 20th, 2011 at 17:13

                If you allow me, rather than the existence of Christ (on which no serious scholar has more doubts now) it would be the proof of his divinity, in short, the proof of evidence, the Resurrection. I think there will always be a shadow … we know what entails a "proof" of God, pretty much the end of your faith and the imposition of the evidence.And I do not think that can please me ..

      • Norberto said:

        October 20th, 2011 at 15:37

        It is everywhere … nothing to do with aliens but now no longer fashionable to speak of "chance" and speaks of "extraterrestrials" …. That’s all.

        • Ֆրանչեսկո որդի ամպրոպի said:

          October 20th, 2011 at 15:40

          thus shifting the problrma one step, because where does it come out of the extra-terrestrials?! :)

          • Norberto said:

            October 20th, 2011 at 15:40

            From the case of course … :D

          • Darius said:

            October 21, 2011 at 09:38

            But that step check of the question, but why the hypothetical aliens would have to do this? They are cute jokers wasting resources unimaginable just to make a kind of candid-camera-term secular? =)

  12. Nut said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 15:36

    Prof. Di Lazzaro … I’m not an expert … in fact … I understood little of what he wrote because I’m not very familiar with certain terms and scientific concepts … out of curiosity I went on wikipedia and I’m not sure what difference there is between the ‘ crown effect and radiation … looking at the footnotes Fanti seems to me that while she supports both cases only the second … is that correct?

    • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

      October 20th, 2011 at 17:15

      The only point of union between the radiative hypothesis and the hypothesis is that the crown corona emits (even you!) And ultraviolet light in the far ultraviolet. However, as Professor Giulio Fanti crown in his articles on the effect (the most recent of which is cited in the bibliography of the article) says he got a stain on the entire outer surface of the fibrils, suggests that in his If the discharge electrons are interacting with the surface colored linen and flax.
      Unfortunately they are only hypotheses, because it still lacks a systematic, complete and satisfactory interaction between the corona and the linen fabric. It is not easy experiments, of course.

  13. Qumran said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 15:55

    Welcome on my part, I was not aware of interest in Enea in the Shroud. She says that "the ultraviolet (UV) as a candidate able to get two of the main features of the Shroud" . And the other features? So the truth is not in the ultraviolet … right? It seems to be only the hypothesis that is closest, right? I understand though that probably says in the next article.

    • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

      October 20th, 2011 at 17:23

      Yes, an organic response to your question will be the second part.
      The advance that a color identical to that of the Shroud has not obtained any. For now, efforts are aimed to get closer to the desired result, but the company is difficult: in fact has been called "the image impossible."
      As for us, in the second part we will explain that the excimer laser is a powerful tool to find the physical and chemical reactions can potentially explain the image formation. But no one can think that one or a thousand laser systems have generated the image on the Shroud in 1260 or in the first century AD

      • Qumran said:

        October 20th, 2011 at 17:29

        Thank you! I take advantage of his kindness to another question .. so, or the laser (although potentially) or anything, right?

        In short, do not yet know how the image was formed, but we can be sure to eliminate all (and I stress all) tools have man back in 2011. Am I wrong?

  14. Fabrizio said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 16:37

    Walter McCrone in Acc Chem. Res 1990.23, 77-83 even identifies the presence of Hg (cinnabar) in the red areas of the Shroud.She says be human blood, can comment?

    • Peter said:

      October 20th, 2011 at 16:47

      And why ‘should?
      He takes care of how you and ‘the image formed.

    • Daphnos said:

      October 20th, 2011 at 17:32

      I would not be the person I requested, it ‘the most suitable answer, but … have been identified in numerous chemical dyes on the Shroud, but in very small traces. This is not surprising, as the authors of the copies, once finished with it, crushing the fabric of the copy of the original tissue, contaminating it.

      Regardless of the blood stains, it is also humbling to see many competent scholars who, although very difficult to resolve the question of the formation of the Shroud with a sponge, they say that this is formed by means of chemical dyes …

    • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

      October 20th, 2011 at 17:43

      Dear Fabrizio, I have a better idea: instead of commenting I urge you to read the comment of an eyewitness to the "analysis" of McCrone, Professor Ray Rogers, a great scientist we talked about responding to a question from Jack.
      I invite you to read the article http://shroud.com/pdfs/rogers2.pdf in particular paragraph 2) page. 4.
      A second comment (clear) Rogers on Mc Crone can be found at the websitehttp://shroudofturin.wordpress.com/2011/09/23/more-on-mccrone/

      I love the writing style of Ray Rogers, so clear, concise, precise … typical of those who dominate the argument. If she were to Fabrizio excite
      the writings of Rogers, I suggest you look at his comments on Intellectual Mc Crone the book "A Chemist’s Perspective On The Shroud of Turin" by Raymond N. Rogers, 2008 ISBN 9780651239286. A preview is on http://www.shroud.com/books.htm
      And remember, Rogers knew very, very well … Mc Crone

    • Emanuela Marinelli said:

      October 20th, 2011 at 19:32

      Dear Fabrizio, I would like to comment on his statement "She says be human blood." Look, Di Lazzaro does not say based on his research, but to those of the scientists report in the bibliography. I point out again the two articles mentioned by Di Lazzaro and add three more, all written by people who have conducted analysis of material taken directly from the Shroud:
      BAIMA Bollon, PL – Investigations of identifying threads of the Shroud – Journal of the Academy of Medicine of Turin, No. 1-12, 1982, pp.. 228-239.
      HELLER, JH – ADLER AD – Blood on the Shroud of Turin – Applied Optics, Vol 19, No. 16, August 15, 1980, pp.. 2742-2744.
      HELLER, JH – ADLER AD – A Chemical Investigation of the Shroud of Turin – Canadian Society of Forensic Sciences Journal, Vol 14, No. 3, 1981, pp.. 81-103.
      JUMPER, EJ – ADLER AD – JP JACKSON – Pellicori SF – HELLER JH – DRUZIK JR – A Comprehensive Examination of the Various Stains and Images on the Shroud of Turin – Archaeological Chemistry III, ACS Advances in Chemistry No. 205, JB Lambert, Editor, Chapter 22, American Chemical Society, Washington DC, 1984, pp.. 447-476.
      SCHWALBE, THE – ROGERS, RN – Physics and Chemistry of the Shroud of Turin, A Summary of the 1978 Investigation – Analytica Chimica Acta, Vol 135, 1982, pp.. 3-49.
      She knows that is not enough to accidentally find a trace of cinnabar to say that all of the shroud is the work of an artist. To explain it to a follower of McCrone, with whom I was having lunch during a conference Shroud, I had him politely that he had jumped out of juice the tie. He looked at the spot and said smiling: "Oh, but you can hardly see!" So I warned him: "Yes, but ‘did not give his tie McCrone, because if you analyze that speck, he concludes that she is a tomato!":-o

      • henry said:

        October 20th, 2011 at 23:19

        @ Emanuela Marinelli

        Forgive the questions, in part because it has already dealt with the topic.
        The amount of cinnabar is really so small on the shroud. Based on analytical data which we can say that.
        Compared to McCrone, who was also the presence of Fe2O3 as a pigment for the construction of the image, even in this case the amount found on the shroud is incompatible with this hypothesis (due to image pigment)?
        I have also read more than FeIII oxide that have been raised doubts about its mineral because it seems to me, does not contain impurities typical of mineral origin and not caused by oxidation of Fe organic compounds ( heme), which would be devoid of these impurities.
        However, some have suggested the presence of these pigments in contact with the original images were overlaid.
        So the two answers are not very compatible with each other?
        O pigments are well or well are not.
        I have found in debating on the site UAAR than a thesis that Gregory S. Paul (designer) who claimed not to have the shroud human proportions, especially in relation to body length and head cephalic index.
        However, it was based on the reconstruction of a body in 3D, but the shroud, and I do not think is a correct approach (I think that such studies are being conducted by Giulio Fanti than the anatomical proportions).
        It seems to me that the same trough Fanti suggest a tomb or a bed of natron to justify the anatomical position of the arm.
        And ‘necessary or there are other cases of posture?

        No more questions, sorry.
        Personally I think it is already rather unique crucifixion his wrists, which does not seem to have examples of medieval iconography, to inspire a certain awe and open the door to a possible doubt.

        Thank you.

  15. Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 16:51

    I thank everyone for the welcome, I hope to bring a contribution to the discussion of the scientific aspects of this mysterious image.
    The time for me is a tyrant, but if you have patience, I’ll try to answer any questions that you have a minimum of competence.

  16. Renato Valsecchi said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 17:34

    If I may I’d like to ask you something: I read your answer to just above Qumran in which he speaks of "image impossible."According to his experience and his range of knowledge, there is another picture / portrait / representation to the world that can also be defined as "impossible"?
    That is, the shroud is the only existing image of which has not yet able to explain the formation and origin?

    Thank you right now for any response.

    • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

      October 20th, 2011 at 17:58

      Apart from the Shroud, I do not know a ‘"impossible image" so strained that puts the scientist who tries to falsify it, but this does not mean that there is.
      I’m just a scientist lent to the studies of the Shroud image, but not Shroud is an expert. In the first comments I read with pleasure the greetings of Prof. Marinelli, maybe she is able to respond to the demand for relevant Valsecchi

  17. Rebecca said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 18:14

    By Dr. Lazarus … I am following with great interest his precise responses to friends of the blog and let me ask you something more personal. Feel free not to respond … of course has never been afraid of being discriminated against (from other colleagues, for example) for his interest in the Shroud, contributing among other things-at least from my point of view-to strengthen the hypothesis of authenticity. I know her past with her silly accusations by Antonio Lombatti … take care of the Shroud is not how to care for the CERN Neutrinos … it is clear that strings are much more sensitive touch … no fear? no attacks received (over Lombatti, but leave things as they are)?

    • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

      October 20th, 2011 at 18:29

      Dear Rebecca, she raises a problem and an important topic, in response to which we must open our hearts and have the patience to sort memories, emotions, feelings, disappointments, surprises … I think it would take a blog to the well capacity.
      I let fly on the personal aspects, at least here.

  18. Octavius ​​said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 21:07

    Late arrival .. a lot has already answered my questions … I just have to study the article, thank dr. Lazarus and give him a big welcome!

  19. Mikhail Tal said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 21:32

    @ Piero
    probably means the maximum Screwtape Blog?

    • Peter said:

      October 20th, 2011 at 21:42

      I do not think. I do not think his style. It seems to me an atheist, well-trained. She’d already after two post ‘laugh chickens.

      • Peter B. said:

        October 21, 2011 at 15:22

        There are five good reasons to believe that Max and Julia’s blog Screwtape is the same person.
        1) Screwtape has discovered, by IP address, that he who calls himself Max commented on the same blog also under other names: Norberto / Daouda. (As is customary for our Julia / Leptis Magna / Sidok / …)
        2) The fakes are discussed between them (as is usual for doubling the personality Julia)
        3) When it is discovered with their hands in the bag, at negative Then the evidence begins to treat stammering something like that someone secretly uses his PC. (Typical attitude of our militant)
        4) Maximum style is very similar to that of Julia of the last times, so much so that after a few posts in which he shows a fake interest in the discussion (but also a certain culture – remember that Giulia is spin doctors, puts his mouth on everything) begins to attack the person.
        5) Maximum in a post he wanted to talk about an acquaintance specifying, for no reason, the name. Look ‘is called Julia.This test will seem unconvincing, but if you think about what is the point to specify the name of an acquaintance in the middle of a speech and in a blog frequented by people who do not know personally?

        • Peter said:

          October 21, 2011 at 15:45

          The only question I have and ‘on your first point.
          But if it is not ‘that can not even understand them,’ these things IP? How else would I have done caught on to the identity ‘= Leptis Julia? Do not deepen as not to give valuable suggestions to hide …
          Maybe this time, and ‘"Wallace", remember? It seems to me to be a professor, or researcher, or at least familiar to the University ‘of Bologna (see and time ‘and it really true that’ a friend of Julia. And then I’ve only seen a couple of posts huh! is not ‘I’ll kill you to keep up.

        • GiuliaM said:

          October 21, 2011 at 15:46

          Indeed, the style from "sotuttoio" is his. It sticks well to post ironic though obviously to put its beak … It was caught on quickly to other users and had to beat a retreat ignominiously:D

  20. sto’co’frati and hoes the garden said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 21:48

    I was following with great passion another "article" about this wonderful site, but I would like to thank on behalf of all the sappers, the presence of Prof.Paolo Di Lazzaro.

  21. Luke said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 22:49

    Questions for Dr. Di Lazzaro:
    1) What do you think it is this cloth?
    2) Are you Catholic? if so, the work they do on the Shroud has strengthened or weakened in faith?
    Thanks Dr!
    Luke

    • Moraldi Fabio said:

      October 20th, 2011 at 23:11

      Dear Luke, reading the answer I gave to Rebecca Di Lazzaro we understand that understandably wants to avoid expression outside the scientific field. It seems to me a very wise and responsible choice.

  22. Salcito Michael said:

    October 20th, 2011 at 23:52

    Despite the fact that the Shroud image is outside the normal laws of physics and chemistry is still trying to find what might have been the set of factors that, because contemporary among them, in an exceptional time, would produce the image of the crucifix on the Shroud . While the heat was not the determining factor we can not exclude that a man just died on the cross did not have a temperature of at least 45 ° C, we can not exclude some interaction (hyperthermia combined) between the skin and the canvas shroud imbued with the characteristics of a liquid antiputrefattive, we can not exclude that there has been some influence of the tomb in the climate (temperature, humidity, pressure, etc.,) and we can not even afford to assume that the Gospels lie when they recall a earthquake that occurred after the death of Jesus, because magnetic waves during the aftershocks may have caused some corona that we ignore today. Before you think that God has specifically wanted to leave this sign I’d be down to earth, because God, to indicate the various stages of his plan for humanity, as signs has always used the natural elements. With the shroud there is nothing paranormal, but if, after investigation and verification, proves the absence of physical factors known to us and we were to agree on a form of light as a factor that produced the image, then indeed we would be in front of the undeniable evidence that the Man of the Shroud is risen. But who else but Christ could have received a grace so great? At that point, the search would end.

  23. Emanuela Marinelli said:

    October 21, 2011 at 01:40

    To keep our feet on the ground, you have to start from the characteristics of the image: dehydration, oxidation and conjugation of the structure of the linen with extreme superficiality. And then, 45 ° C (assuming by contradiction that a body can have the same temperature) are sufficient to dehydrate and oxidize the flax? I think not. Interactions favored by liquid antiputrefattivi?Assumptions already discussed, tested and abandoned even by those who have pursued for years: just think of two doctors like John and Sebastian Judica Cordiglia Rodante. And how many sheets of poor dead in their bed and an earthquake have been found as the Shroud images? Zero. The "appropriate testing" started more than a hundred years ago and most of the hypotheses were discarded thirty years ago with the publication of the results of the Shroud of Turin Research Project that documented precisely that dehydration, oxidation and conjugation of the structure of the flax with extreme superficiality of the above. So "we can rule out" the above assumptions, just keeping your feet on the ground.

    • Salcito Michael said:

      October 21, 2011 at 07:42

      But I was talking to co-factors that normally are never found together because it’s "quite" rare that a crucifix might have been a tomb of that kind. To try to engage in new forensic research on the Shroud I find it counterproductive to go and tell them that, based on research done in the past, the Man of the Shroud is risen. An account is faith (which I can focus on myself), another thing is that scientific research must follow its logical path. The real discoveries can not be done assuming that no researcher could have made a mistake which was then dragged through the generations of scholars … because is not that the Shroud we can scrutinize how and when we want (no one pretenderebbbe ever) and we must "trust" of tests performed so well that even today we do not have a shred of a clear and compelling summary of the scientific discoveries made by STURP (for example). But are you really Marinelli?

      • Emanuela Marinelli said:

        October 21, 2011 at 10:41

        Sorry, Michael, but you’ve read the article I already mentioned below and you risegnalo?
        Jumper, EJ – ADLER AD – JP JACKSON – Pellicori SF – HELLER JH – DRUZIK JR – A Comprehensive Examination of the Various Stains and Images on the Shroud of Turin – Archaeological Chemistry III, ACS Advances in Chemistry No. 205, JB Lambert, Editor, Chapter 22, American Chemical Society, Washington DC, 1984, pp.. 447-476.
        I think not, otherwise you would use "still do not have a shred of a clear and compelling summary of the scientific discoveries made ​​by STURP". That article is a magnificent summary of research results STURP, which moreover were announced at a press conference at the Congress of New London (Connecticut, USA) in October 1981. Results STURP time we talked a lot in Italy. Obviously you’re not interested in that period of the Shroud, because otherwise you will remember.
        Do you doubt that I am Emanuela Marinelli? Then go and read what was written last night Dr. Nicolotti on the blog that I’m OCCF exchanging messages are very tender. I do not become jealous, huh?

        ;-)

        • Salcito Michael said:

          October 21, 2011 at 14:49

          Actually I was only in 1981 and I was involved with the Shroud. I knew that was you. It was just a joke. Your punchline explains why the Shroud as it may fail to develop: as long as there are sindonologists who think that deep down there is always envy or malice, or are competing to be the most prominent of the other … ‘had also said Cardinal. Poletto not serve the first women in Shroud, you must serve the truth. I understand that for you, after so many years of doing confrenze around the world saying certain things, it might be hard to admit that some information was a little ‘forced … but you have to grow in life, not just age.

          • Emanuela Marinelli said:

            October 21, 2011 at 15:40

            "There are sindonologists who think that deep down there is always envy or malice, or are competing to be more visible than others …" You mean to me?? "He had also called the card. Poletto not serve the first women in Shroud, you must serve the truth. " You mean to me?? "I understand that for you, after so many years of doing confrenze around the world saying certain things, it might be hard to admit that some information was a little ‘forced … but you have to grow in life, and not just getting old." Ah, yes, you mean to me … I’m sorry for you, Michael, if you reduced to such thoughts. At this point of me not even merit a response.

            • Salcito Michael said:

              October 21, 2011 at 17:39

              But the question of the conference is not it true? Why be afraid to question their own?

          • Leonardo Minniti Paul said:

            October 21, 2011 at 15:47

            But she appears to Salcombe is a Nicolotti? It seems to me that you have shared the same hobby of shooting on the prof. Marinelli can not understand … just like a stranger in Ivrea socio-economic research may have something to say about the level of teacher authority, if it does not involve a good dose of envy. Rather than attack ad personam, the answer was very thorough. Why do not you stay on the subject?

            • Salcito Michael said:

              October 21, 2011 at 17:35

              I think that you are not fully informed. He saw that no one needs to copy from the Internet? If the place where work is a socio-economic research center does not mean that I should do research, "perhaps" in the field of the Shroud are a little … see ‘her. If you try to look at the site of Antonio Lombatti see how many blog entries I’ve already taken in defending the Shroud and its image. Marinelli has made the presentation of my book on the Shroud, 3 years ago and some divergence of views is normal.

              • Leonardo Minniti Paul said:

                October 21, 2011 at 17:53

                It is one thing to have a divergence of views (in fact you have them otherwise you know how boring!) Is one thing to accuse the party of being "a prima donna" of "not only grow and grow old" . Ugly and unkind words, moreover, such a lady. Free personal attacks, just as I have seen it done by Nicolotti. My reference to its low profile on the subject was only to point out that what "having to grow up" and she is certainly not the professor, no matter what it says or stands for. I continue to notice, however, that a (actually two) purely technical answers you have responded with a personal attack. It is part of the divergence of views as well?

                • Emanuela Marinelli said:

                  October 21, 2011 at 18:10

                  Dear Leonardo, our comments have crossed. The book he wrote at the time I Salcito so correct and of correction, before presenting it to the editor, Did I practically rewritten. The comparison with Nicolotti you can not do, be offended Nicolotti, who wrote independently and I do not owe anything. They are two different stories and two different sources of insults that I have nothing in common. Nor do I believe that the two are known. It does not matter anyway. The insults, always, disqualify those who spear and this is in everyone’s eyes!

                  • Ingrid said:

                    October 21, 2011 at 18:49

                    As I have also asked the Professor. Nicolotti … but why not be the place that works well?

                    We are all Christians, and yet … definitely will Salcito also wrote many interesting things, but he does not think twice about insulting those who think differently. And once again against her, Professor Marinelli. I understand that it was very offended by his words (spoken by a friend, then), I hurt myself a woman and maybe that is why he responded so abrupt and equally rude (although it is probably the truth) .

                    But this only serves to polarize even more positions, the opposite of what Cardinal Poletto said: "Every event of the shroud helps to converge our attention on the image of a man" .

                    • Emanuela Marinelli said:

                      October 21, 2011 at 19:20

                      Excuse me, Ingrid, but where I would have said "so sudden and so rude"? Salcombe has brought up made my preface to his book, I did not want to talk about the birth of this book for obvious reasons, but if he provides partial and does not explain how we got to the preface, and also reduces the speech a ‘divergence of views ", I must complete the information for honest’ to Nicolotti, who had been unfairly lumped together in a previous comment by Leonardo Paul Minniti, who obviously did not know the situation. The blog is this, to inform and clarify. I can reassure you that what I wrote as a clarification to the words of Salcombe was the least I could do and I do not think just being rude to him by adding a duty to clarify his words. She asks "why do not you work?" And what I did with Salcombe, for his book? It was not just a collaboration? And how else I could still work with him? And with Nicolotti? What do you suggest? Would work with her as these two gentlemen?

                    • Ingrid said:

                      October 21, 2011 at 19:49

                      I state that I am no one, if not just a mom and a student of political science. I have not found naturally courteous words Salcito and a little ‘rude remark in his reply that they did for him. It is one thing to say: "I helped him a lot, finding him and supporting him in his book publishers", another is to say "I have virtually rewritten the book" (and I do not doubt that it is not true). But anyway I understand his reaction.The invitation is open to all to cooperate, to all Christians. Maybe starting from what we have in common, from what it believes to be true, from what you share.

                      Collaboration in my opinion also addresses the criticism of the vision of others, but without reference to the person, remaining only in the specific. Nicolotti must criticize such Frale if you disagree with what she says but can not ridicule a person, to the delight of Antonio Lombatti that immediately

                    • Salcito Michael said:

                      October 21, 2011 at 21:45

                      Dear Ingrid, I’m not attacking Emanuela Marinelli as a person for whom I have every respect and I am surprised that you did not do yet. At the beginning of the speech I simply asked to have the humility to be able to call into question what has been said since 1978 on the Shroud to truly understand where we are and what we should do to move forward in research. Marinelli is imposed for making you go you ignorant and a trimming of slliti fien in pdf format in English (and patience, we will do the translation …) I do not judge the sinner, but at least I can denounce sin? It is no sin may have the habit of saying "I am here, I there, if I was not there what he was doing nothing, if there was I was there … even the Shroud." This is what must change and the more people like Marinelli has to do it? Marinelli is not kind when, in order to get the chair is to say that almost made her my book. Marinelli needs to understand that is no longer the Shroud of Pippo Baudo and that it is tired of the old generation sindonolgi that behave like the old barons of the science of the past. That’s it. And ‘perhaps no coincidence that in Turin, where resides the Commission for the Conservation of the Shroud is not mati Marinelli was so popular? As people respected, but certainly on a Shroud has always been much criticized and can not continue to be vella while half of the proof that she was going to shout from the rooftops are crollanco under the blows of the search a bit ‘more serious. I do not venerate Nicolotti but I appreciate what he did because it became really trouble finding reliable sources while going against personal opinions of the Shroud. Excuse me for lunghezzza …

                    • Santambrogio Michael said:

                      October 21, 2011 at 23:01

                      @ Salcombe: I’m watching the debate and I assure you that I think is doing a very bad shape, worse even than its position. I do not know if a problem is simple lack of civil education or other, however it seems to me absurd to say "I’m not attacking Emanuela Marinelli as a person for whom I have every respect" after I told her "but you have to grow in life, not just aging " and before you say " Marinelli must understand that is no longer the Shroud of Pippo Baudo and that it is tired of the old generation sindonolgi that behave like the old barons of the science of the past " . Gentlemen, but what game are we playing? But it would have the courage to repeat these things in the face of teacher (perhaps with her ​​husband next?). It would take at least two good slaps, deservedly so. If you are a Shroud "new generation" I prefer much more the old barons.

                    • sto’co’frati and hoes the garden said:

                      October 22, 2011 at 14:35

                      Lord or Professor or Doctor Enshrined michele would like us common people do not hit the sensitivity of Professor Marinelli, in order to be able to read even in response to His precious esperimento.Bisogna should note that the Shroud does not "belong" only to the 2 million visitors from Turin but also to all other believers and skeptics …. or curious.

                    • Franz said:

                      October 22, 2011 at 14:38

                      Add that to think of speaking on behalf of the Shroud ( "Marinelli must understand that is no longer the Shroud of Pippo Baudo and that it is tired of the old generation sindonolgi that behave like the old barons of the science of the past" ) is quite ridiculous on his part and is very prima donna.

                    • Emanuela Marinelli said:

                      October 22, 2011 at 15:12

                      Zappator Dear, I hope you will not be disappointed if I do not respond to your request for comment on the experiment of Salcombe. I do not think the case for a number of reasons that do not list it easy to understand. I received privately heartfelt appeals of friends who invited me not to disqualify down to the level of such individuals, who are not worthy of dialogue or response, polite or rude they are. For this no longer comment on anything that relates to Salcombe. The same applies to Nicolotti, which insists on the blog with its I think at this point that someone who wants to pull back out of cowardice … I sit back to common sense! And I apologize to Dr. Di Lazzaro once again for using this space to comment on his wonderful article, but for personal clarification. I think he will forgive me and I am confident that others will do just as readers of this blog.

                    • Peter said:

                      October 22, 2011 at 16:46

                      @ Zappator polite
                      but you’re referring to ‘"experiment" the doll?
                      It ​​seems to me to have it demolished fairly easily (and are not certoun sindologo).
                      However, I ask an opinion on my post to fellow engineers (and maybe even architects, it should be ‘ ;)) to verify that I have not done something wrong …

            • Emanuela Marinelli said:

              October 21, 2011 at 18:02

              Dear Leonardo,
              of Christian charity did not want to say in public that the publication of that bookhttp://www.shopforall.it/shop3/product_info.php?pid=9788884241308&lang=it
              Salcito owes all to me, because I did not only preface, I found him also the publisher. This is a reflection on the Shroud and suffering written by a person suffering in his life and knows it will not say more to respect the privacy of Salcombe. It is not the only thing I did for him: I have been in contact with other people for other publications. Of course at that time the output of his book I never expected that one day it would come to write to me those things I’ve read here today, that can not be described as "some divergence of views". But patience, who knows what to do I have to read. Do not add anything else.

              • Salcito Michael said:

                October 21, 2011 at 18:35

                …. Arieccoci with the first women ….

                • Leonardo Minniti Paul said:

                  October 21, 2011 at 19:00

                  I do not have it with you, if not for the fact that it distracted from this beautiful article. But surely the Professor.Marinelli is a prima donna, which is currently the most experienced woman of the Shroud that there is in the world. It does not seem at all strange to have a network of relationships that we can put you in touch with you as a writer emerging publishers. And it’s not going to flaunt around, but later reveals that this writer / researcher emerging hurts her asking her to "grow and not just getting old."

                  However, the rudeness is doing it also to the dr. Lazarus and we all want to impress upon the facts and personal retaliations. I am very interested, I say really get to know his thought "technical" on the Shroud. We can go forward?

                  • Emanuela Marinelli said:

                    October 21, 2011 at 19:26

                    I fully agree with Paul Leonardo. Here you should discuss the origin of the Shroud and Article of dr. Of Lazarus. No more comments are not relevant and … naughty!;-)

                • Salcito Michael said:

                  October 21, 2011 at 22:16

                  … And maybe he also wrote and published my other books …

                  • Salcito Michael said:

                    October 21, 2011 at 22:20

                    You can certainly move forward in the certainty that those who understand the true motivations will document this controversy. I promise to get back to my place!

                    • Leonardo Minniti Paul said:

                      October 21, 2011 at 23:05

                      Well, then what is its technical position on the Shroud? In addition to charges on a personal basis and the famous phrase "" still do not have a shred of a clear and compelling summary of the scientific discoveries made ​​by STURP " I do not think he even said anything useful to the debate …

      • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

        October 21, 2011 at 10:56

        Salcombe, if I may try to make a little order in their considerations, which are not trivial but need some clarification.
        It ‘true that scientific research requires inspection and testing, it is no coincidence that the motto of the Italian Society Physics is "Try and try again."
        However, this need to be managed with a grain of salt: Every day before in my lab, I can not get to measure the electron charge to be sure that the photodiode signal on the oscilloscope I give the correct amount of charge associated impulse laser. The electron charge, measured many years ago, give for granted. If every time I went back to Adam and Eve, not ever would get no new discovery.
        Returning to the Shroud, it is most studied object in the world, starting with the negative picture of Secondo Pia in 1898.But the boundary line, the demarcation was given by the results of the measures STURP. It is no coincidence that in my article does not speak of the earlier measures, it is only after we know STURP a good approximation of what are the characteristics of the image, what we try to play.
        His proposals, Salcombe, have already been tested in the pre-STURP, and have provided results consistent with the picture characteristics that I listed in the article, if you have the patience to read it.

        Finally, it is absolutely true that "we do not have a shred of a clear and compelling summary of the scientific discoveries made by STURP". And ‘the contrary, we have too many! Three of these summaries of the literature found in the article, for example, the reference "Heller" and "Schwalbe" and "Jumper" in 1984. There are also other, but in my opinion these are the best.

        • Salcito Michael said:

          October 21, 2011 at 21:58

          Excuse me doctor, but I was trying to put myself in the shoes of those who stubbornly continue to attack the Shroud, and sometimes you are naturally a little ‘of discouragement and think: "maybe it’s all wrong" is a question that is natural and that knowing that many are in doubt, try to stimulate the best minds to illustrate the characteristics of the Shroud. Read his studio and let you know.

    • Salcito Michael said:

      October 23, 2011 at 11:02

      I forgot: today is the funeral do three days of death and then no one would associate with a high temperature of the deceased. Instead, the burial of Jesus was rapid, ie, about two hours from death. Now, a person who has suffered and has been teaching with ongoing infection, bleeding, and everything that entails being crucified is certain that the body temperature was high. It is therefore a condition that must be kept in mind if you think that the factor that determined the image resulted from both somatic body of the Man of the Shroud.

  24. Cheshire Cat said:

    October 21, 2011 at 08:47

    Speaking of ‘impossible images’, the Veil of Manoppello is one of these? Congratulations for the article.

    • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

      October 21, 2011 at 12:01

      I have never studied the Veil of Manoppello, what I know comes from interesting seminars in the IWSA international conference I organized in May 2010 in Frascati http://www.acheiropoietos.info and my visit to the Shrine of Manoppello with Some "guides" exception.
      A summary of the things said in Frascati on the Veil can be found at the websitehttp://www.acheiropoietos.info/proceedings/proceedings.php where it can read four articles on the subject (I advise you to click on "Topics" in the first row of the table to more easily find the articles sorted by topic).
      With the benefit of inventory, I can tell you that it is an image with some special characteristics that make the film an interesting field of study, and I understand that a group of the CNR is doing research into the subject.
      A big difference from the Shroud is that, using modern technology, I can think of being able to play a very similar image (coloring with a wire to a lot of patience Once, for example) and play the same color on the individual fibrils of the linen of the Shroud with different density aerolite company is much more difficult.

  25. @ stefan said:

    October 21, 2011 at 09:39

    Dr. Di Lazzaro,
    a scientist you agree that scientific analysis can never provide proof of the supernatural nature of the image of the shroud?
    Greetings

    • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

      October 21, 2011 at 10:34

      She raises an interesting question, perhaps the wrong person, because I am not an expert in the philosophy of science, I just read many years ago, a work of Karl Popper’s "Logic of Scientific Revolutions" in which the reference to get an idea of the personal concept of falsifiability of the experiments, meaning the ability to control an experiment in the sense of Galileo’s reproducibility.
      In the case of the Shroud, allow me to trivialize the situation (Popper did not have bad): we are facing today is not an image that we able to reproduce and qfalsificare

  26. Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

    October 21, 2011 at 10:38

    Excuse me, started sending in error, finish my thought.
    We are dealing with an image that today we are not able to reproduce and falsify.
    This does not mean that we can do tomorrow or the next day. We do not know.
    We set a date for your convenience today. Well, today we can say what u Chenice origin of the Shroud image is that you can not reproduce in all its details, even with the most advanced technology.
    Point.
    But if we think this conclusion, however partial , it is useful: for example, allows us to reject the hypothesis of a medieval forger.
    Does it seem a little?

    • @ stefan said:

      October 21, 2011 at 11:41

      The mystery of the shroud is precisely the fact that to date not been able to make an exact replica. This does not exclude the possibility that the shroud was made ​​in the Middle Ages technique now lost. Although we can not know. Assuming be able to identify a technique that can make an exact replica, should be assessed the ability of this technique in those days.
      As for the test of carbon made ​​at the time, in my opinion would be appropriate to a repetition mode they can put to rest any complaints.

      • Emanuela Marinelli said:

        October 21, 2011 at 12:06

        Dear Stephen, "the technique is now lost" should include the subject of the Shroud winding around a corpse to make it stain of blood that way, and then the realization of the image without affecting the blood stains. She really believes it can in the Middle Ages? There you can in twenty-first century! :-O

      • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

        October 21, 2011 at 12:18

        Dear Stefan, I believe, there is no "technique was lost." In the second part of the article, comment on the main differences of the staining that we obtained at ENEA than the color of the Shroud, enter in some technical detail. If you have the patience to read it, you realize that you can not get the same result, neither now nor in 1260, when the only techniques were applied pigments and powders in contact. No chance.
        I will stop here, but I could speak of bilirubin (invisible to the naked eye) exudate, the need to first put the stains of blood and then the body color, knowledge of anatomy, etc etc that exclude beyond a reasonable doubt the hypothesis of medieval forger

      • Antonio72 said:

        October 21, 2011 at 13:01

        @ Stefan

        If I understand you claim that science might also explain supernatural phenomena, which is obviously beyond the limits of science.
        Science can possibly reproduce the phenomenon in the lab, which then becomes a natural phenomenon in all respects.The rest falls under the unprovable conjecture, although some may reject a priori, eg. the fact that a human corpse in the ordinary environmental conditions, may constitute themselves as a source of radiation of this magnitude. Nor can so easily believe the hypothesis of a possible human technology perdutasi medieval street in the course of history. Otherwise you should accept other fanciful theory, such as the pyramids built by extraterrestrial superior technology. Indeed, paradoxically, the idea of resurrection would become even more credible.

        • @ stefan said:

          October 21, 2011 at 13:21

          Thank you for your comments. I have no competence nor specific or generic to be able to sustain a discussion in detail.I do not find so weird to say that you can lose track of a technique known in the past, but I see that you do not agree. I know that the topic is a debate that often lead religious aspects linked to the controversial plan. An engineer who thinks I am down to earth only by making the trivial observation that if you wrap an object in a towel, and this object moved to its mark, the mark that appears on the cloth resulting distorted opened widely, and not as a perfectly proportioned that of the shroud. But I expect that there is an answer to this too.

          • Antonio72 said:

            October 21, 2011 at 13:46

            It’s not that I do not agree in advance, but for consistency you should accept other theories much more imaginative.As far as I know we could be the descendants of the survivors of a post-atomic was very remote.
            If it were true that exposes the thesis, you should necessarily take two opposite conclusions:
            The Shroud is a fake and never wrapped any human corpse, or
            the ‘ Shroud image was produced by a supernatural event and therefore not reproducible or explainable by science.
            And as I speak too mundane, aspect of any response.

          • Emanuela Marinelli said:

            October 21, 2011 at 14:05

            Dear @ Stefan, since when the engineers are down to earth reasoning? I do not dare to make this revelation with my husband, who is an engineer … Instead I urge you to read what I suggested in yesterday at 23:47 Erico, that these two articles: http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/marineli.pdf http: / / www.sindone.info/FANTI4A.PDF can also contact, as I said to Henry, directly Prof. Fanti: http://www.dim.unipd.it/fanti/ And thank you for participating in the debate!;-)

          • Nofex said:

            October 21, 2011 at 16:00

            Dear @ Stefan, is simply not acceptable to the thesis of the "lost technique". I too am an engineer (with or without feet on the ground) but there is just such an alternative. You have been perfectly explained above. Just add that you should revolutionize the whole history of science and medicine, perhaps anticipating the invention of the microscope or the anatomical knowledge / physiological example. Moreover, as ever with this "lost technique" was achieved only the Shroud and nothing else? I think that support the "lost technique" may be legitimate but is also a very elegant way out, like the so-called "god of the gaps".

            • Peter said:

              October 21, 2011 at 16:06

              This fact, even I (I’m an engineer and I agree).
              Somewhere you tick off a few photos of 1200, or some cloth woven in a "particular", or even some "unconventional weapon" to scare the enemy ( perhaps more ‘buzurro).
              Can you imagine the French knights who are to appear "by magic" (or their "power") that makes an image to impress the Sultan / local lord? all run away …

              • Klaus said:

                October 21, 2011 at 16:24

                I agree too, that are not an engineer but I am one of the best-known category of enemies of the engineers. In fact this is really a crucial point, in my opinion. In the history of science is generally accepted that if someone invents a new technique, there is someone else who more or less the same time is able to get there. This argument is widely (and attendibimente) used by the "rationalists" that may have existed to deny inventions such as Marconi’s death ray or Chronovisor Ernetti father. But when it comes to shroud this argument seems, again for some of the same rationalist, does not seem to apply.
                I am referring to those who suggest a pre-photographic technique, but also assumptions Garlaschelli. In fact, although the latter has had the good sense to use tools within reach of a craftsman of the ‘300, has not even addressed the question of why, if things had gone as he says, we have dozens of products with the characteristics Shroud (perhaps referring to an assortment of saints and martyrs). There were a lot of money to do the sellers of relics and do not understand why they would have given up.

  27. Peter said:

    October 21, 2011 at 11:37

    Another thing that intrigues me a lot and ‘extreme directionality’ hypothetical beam that would have impressed the Shroud.
    Imagine for a moment to put in a sheet to a mannequin made ​​of plexiglass, and put it inside of the bulbs .
    turning on the light would spread everywhere, and you do not have a clear image.
    There would be an explanation for this extreme directionality ‘, given the assumptions of the extreme ultra-violet light beam?

    I have read the enclosed link neli a possible hypothesis could be that (I apologize for the crudeness of expression), when the body becomes mechanically transparent , sheet collapses and is "impressed" (whatever that means prevents this).
    But ‘In this case the resulting image dovebbe be a sum of all parts of the body, such as a CT scan in which all the various images are superimposed one above the other.
    I hope that I explained.

    • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

      October 21, 2011 at 12:36

      The "body mechanically transparent" is an ad hoc hypotheses, and thus by definition can not be reproduced and not "testable" or falsifiable.
      So, why was it made? The reason is that with the methods known to science, it is not possible to obtain an image similar in both "naturally" or through artifact.
      In other words, scientists are "scrambling" scenarios assuming out of traditional science.
      In the second part of the article I will try to address this issue, explaining also the "scientific" nature of our experiments with ultraviolet light

      • fabio said:

        October 21, 2011 at 14:22

        but if we speak of a body wrapped in a towel tridimenzionale any radiation or else there should show the image on the cloth bidimenzionale you see today, I’ll explain if you wrap a sausage in an oily rag on the rag I will not see the image of the sausage as a photograph, but the spots anointed Institute of the cloth and then an image is incomprehensible. sorry for this example.

        • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

          October 21, 2011 at 14:29

          Fabio, this aspect and its implications in the selection of the possible causes of the image are discussed in the article from which this blog, under "The hypothesis radiative"

    • Salcito Michael said:

      October 21, 2011 at 22:58

      I personally have done a esperimenento in which the glass surface of a common scanner is the burial cloth. I have placed on the scanner trasperente a model of a human body (a trivial toy) I then placed on top of it, to open the scanner, of course, a light bulb operated at low power and thus the intensity of light was very poor. The scan showed that the light passing through the model has allowed us to have a photo in jpg but it is a negative. If you reverse the light and shade gives the true positive as well as the toy really saw him. This experiment, I can see the bottom of the file power point entitled "The Man of the Shroud" on the site http://www.qumran2.net/indice.pax?id=121&tutti=1

      • Peter said:

        October 22, 2011 at 08:56

        It seems to me a poor experiment.
        ‘s not ‘if we do it confirms our thesis and our beliefs then we must stop satisfied.
        It does not work like ‘the scientific method.
        You have just scanned a doll.
        What were expected to appear?
        In scanner the light-sensitive sensor (CCD) moves down while the appropriate LEDs light up the surface to be scanned. If we put on the Rubik’s Cube is the same.

        • Salcito Michael said:

          October 22, 2011 at 11:06

          If you get a Rubik’s cube and it will scan only the positive image of the surface lies the scanner glass. If you use a cube trasperente is the same thing, but if the lights from the back will get a negative image. This test is just to provide a clue not insignificant: the phenomenon that produced the image on the Shroud somatic phenomenon is similar to a "light" not only because the image is negative, but also because they have remained on the canvas images of the body which in reality were not in direct contact with it (as has happened with my toy.

          • Peter said:

            October 22, 2011 at 11:13

            It seems to me that his "experiment" does not prove anything.
            Have you ever thought that you apply the conditions are not present in the Holy Sepulchre?
            Have you ever tried to bet against a window (maybe when the night begins to darken) a Flashlight?
            Have you ever looked through a pane of plexiglass bent and deformed?
            That the phenomenon is of type "radiative" and not due to "contact" it seems to me that it is now clear to all and no one would question, otherwise we would only the signs of the hands, nose, knees …

            • Salcito Michael said:

              October 22, 2011 at 13:06

              Maybe if someone else tries to give us its opinion fails to stay in this dead end ….

              • lorenzo said:

                October 22, 2011 at 15:48

                A "body mechanically transparent" retroilluninato, generates a negative image, that’s fine, but the image could Shroud is also three-dimensional: it should therefore hypothesize that the shroud was also impressed as a function of distance from the cloth of the body, as if a light self-generated by the body, but is attenuated by distance traveled to reach the surface of the linen.

              • Peter said:

                October 22, 2011 at 16:07

                In the dead end there’s only experiment that has nothing , absolutely nothing scientific about.
                First of all the experimental conditions are wrong.
                There was no outside light, it ‘ambient light.
                Then I do not c ‘was certainly a CCD sensor and a light to illuminate the body in parallel.
                It comes to mind that the image is in focus simply and solely because ‘in front of the sensor has a lens that provides the focus of the object placed against the the scanner glass?
                it happens, most parties ‘away from the glass are more’ blurry (which you can ‘see into a sheet a little’ raised from the scanner glass).
                And so ‘, the CCD scanner has some sensitivity ‘of the human eye to different wavelengths lungherzze.
                And that’s not enough, ’cause you do not have a model of "sensitivity’" of the sheet at various wavelengths.
                If you want to make an experiment a minimum credible , should first do it in a dark room, without external ambient light, with only light inside the body, and placing the detector as a positive PHOTO PAPER.

                But even so ‘is not enough.
                In fact, will see ‘photographic paper that will result’ simply a stain more ‘clear, more’ light.
                Nothing to do with the Shroud image. In addition, if maybe take a photo paper pezzodi height equal to that of the doll, will see ‘that probably (depending on what makes up the bulb) the footprint will come out’ outside of the paper. You see, the company turns the surface of a solid object on a flat surface and ‘age-old challenge. To study the Shroud also involves knowing a lot of techniques, materials and methods.
                Have you ever heard of cartography? Take a look at the Mercator projection , and will see ‘that the distortion errors are introduced.
                The only way you will get an image similar to that of the Shroud, and ‘the one for which all the points of light emitting surface of the body, NOT ONE LIGHT INSIDE THE BODY.
                But even so ‘is not enough. It is important that they emit light in a coherent manner, and in exactly the same direction, ie, ‘just like a laser, and coincidentally, that’s what they use e’proprio ENEA.
                I hope that I explained and you have not made ​​mistakes.

                • Salcito Michael said:

                  October 22, 2011 at 16:20

                  And in fact may be the individual cells of the body of the Man of the Shroud to give each its weak beam of light. Do not forget that Gesàù had physiological characteristics of the special, uncommon in humans, one of which was particularly sensitive surface (the first being arrested was a form of hematohydrosis.

                  • Peter said:

                    October 22, 2011 at 16:28

                    No. Even this and ‘wrong.

                    Gesàù had a special physiological characteristics, uncommon in humans, one of which was particularly sensitive surface
                    I do not know that the hematohydrosis is associated with a ‘sensitivity’ shallow ‘(should cheidere a doctor).

                    If the single cell of the body to emit light, then the parties more ‘would be more large’ bright. For example, the luminous body, the less arms, fingers almost nothing. Not to mention the hair and beard.

              • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

                October 22, 2011 at 16:59

                Salcombe, I propose a specific comment, and a more general.
                Specifically, if the intention of his experiment was to "provide a clue not insignificant: the phenomenon that produced the image on the Shroud somatic phenomenon is similar to a light" I do not think that the boundary conditions are used to her evidence.
                In fact, before drawing conclusions she has to take into account the light scanner that interferes with the light from her set on the toy, the collection and detection system (including spectral) of light reflected and diffused, the depth of focus of the imaging lens system of the scanner.
                For example, think of the scanning of a simple page written: If you raise a portion of the page when scanning, the scanner also provides an image of area not in contact, just a little blurry. In the case of an object, the image would have a different luminance between contact areas and not in contact.
                On the negativity get a negative image is not difficult: there is also managed Garlaschelli (article cited in the bibliography) using acids and colored pastes , scraped to obtain some form of gradient. But that’s not the point on which we judge the similarity between copy and original image, there are far more important parameters are difficult to reproduce, as explained in the article above.

                In general, I have noticed his statement and his trial on STURP (on the negative image, as I understand it) on the one hand she does not understand the incredible amount of information derived by expressing STURP and the other (as consequence) is concentrated on the aspects of the prehistory of scientific research on the Shroud, the pre-STURP like the negativity of the image and the possible influence of any thermal effects (disproved by the results of their research STURP).
                guess I’ll jump: you have problems with English? If so, I do not know what to suggest, because 99% of scientific papers are written in English on the image (including ours).
                If you know English well, then not only have to arm yourself with patience and go read I put all the references in the bibliography of the article. Then we’ll talk.

                • lorenzo said:

                  October 22, 2011 at 21:13

                  Thank you, thank you all veramenta: it is truly a joy "dip" in your reasoning. Thank you.

                • Salcito Michael said:

                  October 23, 2011 at 09:01

                  The exact term of that test would be "curious" and as such must be considered. He had certainly no scientific ambition and in fact has been included only in a presentation file of the characteristics of the Shroud in a religiso site. Then if someone offers good ideas, or just there rimmane.
                  With regard to scientific research STURP But let me just say that the Shroud has its capital in Turin and this is spoken in Italian. What does this mean? That those who were appointed by the guardian of the pontifical and,
                  first, by the bishops of Turin, his predecessors have disclosed information about these studies. So if we already have texts in Italian and have been "skimmed", possibly scattered among different authors,
                  which illustrate the substance of the research STURP, because you have to take the prig to go and read the technical reports which
                  takes different skills to understand ? Many scholars have studied them you think? And how many of those who write in this very blog? And how many authors think that the Shroud of books have studied the texts in English STURP? She knows me better than any foreign language if you do not live our brain memory spaces occupied unnecessarily removes and retains only a part, one that is designed better. You can also equip
                  but if that particular report basically tells me that the image is not touching the surface and then perhaps to his fellow specialists in various disciplines go to make sure that these studies have been done in a workmanlike manner, and to witness after a special council with experts on a par? It must be a housewife?Here the need for formation of a board of inquiry that until you have taken at face value what he says is going to occur.
                  Then scientists will be involved and willing valid COMn her to start a new season of studies that certainly we all desire.

                  • Peter said:

                    October 23, 2011 at 10:09

                    The exact term of that test would be "curious" and as such must be considered. He had certainly no scientific ambition and in fact has been included only in a presentation file of the characteristics of the Shroud in a religiso site. Then if someone offers good ideas, otherwise rimmane just there.

                    But it can not ‘enter a’ curiosity ‘"like the one to explain the characteristics of the Shroud. Otherwise we might as well put an apple that falls from the tree.

                    With regard to scientific research STURP (…)
                    is the necessity of forming a board of inquiry that until you have taken at face value what he says is going to occur.

                    I mean ‘she says in a nutshell:
                    1) not to speak English
                    2) from the beginning to remake ALL tests on the Shroud. So why ‘before eating his meals does not lead to a testing laboratory to confirm that there are no changes? Why ‘before leaving no air analysis to see if there are harmful chemicals? Dr. Di Lazzaro I think it was pretty clear about it. Not every time he goes to the laboratory is re-measured the electron charge to see if the previous ones were wrong. He has a strange concept of the scientific method. And that makes me better than to guess ’cause Dr. Marinelli has had to review more’ Sometimes his texts.

                    • Salcito Michael said:

                      October 23, 2011 at 11:06

                      I must point out that his rage against everything I say
                      has nothing to do with a calm debate.

      • lorenzo said:

        October 22, 2011 at 13:08

        On the shroud can be seen only the exit hole of the nails on the wrist, but the entrance hole may well be on the palm.http://www.crucifixion-shroud.com/Barbet.htm

        • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

          October 22, 2011 at 14:42

          Lorenzo, I’m not a doctor lawyer, and his post has nothing to do with the article that triggered this blog.
          I try to answer you from the bottom of my ignorance on the subject, only on the basis of common sense.
          The stain of blood on the hand is broad and does not allow to establish exactly where the hole is placed in the crucifixion. However, we can see that would have torn a hole in the palm of your entire hand (unfit to bear the weight of the body). Giving himself that this is not the case (we do not observe any rupture of the entire hand in the image of the Shroud) seems very reasonable to think that the nail was driven in an area can support the weight, such as that of the wrist.

          • lorenzo said:

            October 22, 2011 at 15:12

            I apologize, but my comment is resulted from the reading of the site indicated by Michele Salcombe, in fact, I’m reminded of the site that I have indicated, in which they brought evidence to show that penetration of the nail in the palm did not exclude the escape from the wrist, without diminish the ability to support the weight of the body without lacerations of the hand.

            • Salcito Michael said:

              October 22, 2011 at 16:09

              The nail penetrated the wrist, passing through the space of Destot near the ulna, and came out on the back, near the radio. Keep in mind that this operation is obviously very painful and the victim writhes even though his hands were tied with ropes to the patibulum (the horizontal axis of the cross) occurred some deformation of articular present between the bones of the wrist.

        • Norberto said:

          October 22, 2011 at 14:56

          There is another document of the first century Roman crucifixion, and also has a hole in the wrists, agreeing and disagreeing with the Shroud with the Christian tradition. Factor to consider when talking about the usual "Christian medieval forger."

          • Peter said:

            October 22, 2011 at 16:11

            would be nice if you post it.

          • Salcito Michael said:

            October 22, 2011 at 16:13

            It reminds us that? I know one but the poor man was pinned against the wood piercing the arm, between the radius and ulna.

            • lorenzo said:

              October 22, 2011 at 20:41

              That the nail is passed through the "area of Destot," I do not support him, but Dr. Frederick T. Zugibe (b. 1928), a leading expert in forensic pathology of the United States: he argues that the nail went through what he calls "space Z ‘. I find only more rational than his theory of Dr. Pierre Barbet. http://www.crucifixion-shroud.com/Barbet.htm

              • Salcito Michael said:

                October 23, 2011 at 08:32

                To hang a human body to the cross there is no more semolina, which imposed the nail in the wrist. The crucifixion was a Roman aprocedura proven. They certainly took place in the history of crucifixions with variants for contempt of the case is not condemned, but the Man of the Shroud (they had already taken into sticking around in the helmet of thorns on his head). Also keep in mind Dr. Barbet up several nights to experiment with amputated limbs until then to get a cross to attack the body of an old woman. Today nromativa cavaderi not allow compliance with the experiments. Zugibe can only make assumptions with the help of his students who are alive and tortured. In fact, he is also asked to attaccasi experiments in which a cross with leather straps, but can not study the real subject of the pathologists crucified if the subject did not suffer the sufferings of the Man of the Shroud. Finally, no one would have imagined to complicate his life and make a tunnel to enter the nail with one hand and the other end.

                • lorenzo said:

                  October 23, 2011 at 16:01

                  In the game of sudoku, the numbers within each region must find their rightful place in individual cells based on a principle of non-repetition which must be respected both horizontally and vertically: it is simply to apply the logic to each statement and analyze it to see whether he agrees or not with the other. In the "game" of science, and in this particular case of the Shroud, I apply the same principle: that is why dating radocarbonio I learned with concern (other open questions without providing answers), which is why I think the fact the most rispondeti Dr. Zugibe responses than those of Dr. Barbet, which is why I look forward to the second part of Dr. Di Lazzaro.

  28. Henry from Bergamo said:

    October 21, 2011 at 23:58

    Very interesting and well done to the author.

    An application has been said that where there is blood there is no underlying image so all the incident radiation was absorbed by the blood. It has been verified as human blood absorbs the UV radiation? What has the blood with UV absorbance

    It would be interesting to analyze also the mantle of the Virgin of Guadaloupe.

    • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

      October 22, 2011 14:31

      Henry, I’ll note that she is making an assumption: that the image is formed by UV radiation. Though our studies have shown that the ENEA color of flax by VUV radiation has some features similsindoniche (this will be discussed extensively in the second part of the article), we can not assume that there has been an "incident radiation" as he wrote her.
      Coming to your question, accepting the hypothesis that a burst of VUV light generated has the Shroud image, yes, the blood has a very high molar absorption in the UV and VUV light. That’s blood (even minimum thickness) absorbs all the UV and VUV radiation incident on it.
      add an information: according to some authors, the UV light could be responsible for the red spots of blood after so much time on their deposition see http://www.ohioshroudconference.com/papers/p04.pdf

      As for the mantle "ayat" of Guadalupe, a good introduction can be found at thehttp://www.acheiropoietos.info/proceedings/EspriellaWeb.pdf

    • Henry from Bergamo said:

      October 22, 2011 at 18:32

      It is true that I have been arbitrarily assumed UV radiation to affect the fabric.
      Thanks for reply, still not sure the subject of the image, the image in the absence of presence of blood can be considered compatible with a formation image as a result of exposure to UV light.

  29. sto’co’frati and hoes the garden said:

    October 22, 2011 at 17:55

    Dear Professor’m always sad when the "dialogue" encounters similar obstacles.

    • Emanuela Marinelli said:

      October 22, 2011 at 20:03

      Patience, dear Zappator. Do you remember when you presentasti on the blog as "an elephant enters a store Do you remember when I called you "Zappator dialogue takes two and a elephant Horton Hears’ as possible. But if there are around wild bulls, who see me as a muleta, I’ll try the same at the beginning, but in the end it is better to give up and decide to take off from in front of their horns …

      ;-)

      • sto’co’frati and hoes the garden said:

        October 22, 2011 at 21:02

        First of all, this is the blog of Professor Paolo Di Lazzaro, and I apologize to him for my intrusione.Sono too hard-headed to believe that there is in the world "lay" a student of the Shroud and "the art of fencing" provisions to intervene in this blog.

        • lorenzo said:

          October 22, 2011 at 21:27

          What does "secular scholar on the Shroud?" If proven means of manipulating scientific research to show only some data may not agree with the Gospel story, only I call this "irrationality".

          • sto’co’frati and hoes the garden said:

            October 23, 2011 at 00:19

            there are, there are secular scholars of the Shroud, and this is good opportunity for presentarsi.NB.Pregasi use the foil and not the sword.

            • lorenzo said:

              October 23, 2011 at 20:23

              I know that there are good secular scholars of the shroud, if it were not for their excellent studies on the cloth in question, our knowledge would not be where I am today. And ‘priprio thanks to them that have been made many of the most significant discoveries.

              • sto’co’frati and hoes the garden said:

                October 24th, 2011 at 00:28

                Thank you and I do not doubt that dici.Probabilmente would be useful, even if in the future, an adversarial approach with other secular scholars.

                • lorenzo said:

                  October 24th, 2011 at 09:03

                  Wrote S. Thomas: "No desire elevates both the man and the desire to know the truth."
                  The problem is that we sometimes we settle for a truth, not truth.
                  I hope Dr. Including those of Lazarus and justifying our chat waiting for the second part of the article.

                  • sto’co’frati and hoes the garden said:

                    October 24th, 2011 at 17:49

                    Bravissimo Lorenzo, in fact, we hope that Dr. Di Lazzaro we "forgive". But you must listen to all the bells to get the "truth." I also ask pardon of all for my "repeatedly in quotation marks."

  30. Luke said:

    October 24th, 2011 at 18:55

    Excuse me, are new and are in no way an expert on the subject. I read with interest your post and being a researcher in the scientific mysteries fascinate me a lot.
    Because I am interested in the shroud to be more or less than 5 minutes forgive me if I say something completely wrong.
    In summary, for the formation of the image on the Shroud would a coherent radiation spread throughout the body and very high frequency (because of low penetration on linen) and that interfere with tissue. Well the first thing, and I ‘came to mind and’ ionizing radiation (alpha?)

    It ‘possible that some "oil" smeared on the body contains some radioactive material? This would explain the diffuse radiation.
    Besides, there was an earthquake that releases radon and watch case and ‘a radioactive gas (with half-life of several hours).What happened is some process of Backscattering?
    Surely this hypothesis and ‘was rejected, but I do not know why. Could you enlighten me on what ‘?
    Thanks in advance
    Luke

  31. Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

    October 25th, 2011 at 10:42

    Luke, welcome to the world of the "curious" to learn more about the Shroud image! We need researchers, especially scientists, because only by addressing this mystery in a professional manner can we hope to put in place the missing pieces of a puzzle very difficult to complete.

    I come to your question.
    Some scholars have considered the hypothesis of the image formed by particle irradiation, in particular to generate protons and neutrons to the image surface "rejuvenate" the tissue by increasing the number of C14. The work and more clear that I have heard about it was presented last year at the IWSA conference in Frascati (www.acheiropoietos.info) by Art Lind and you can find the article on page http://www.acheiropoietos.info/proceedings / LindWeb.pdf
    However, Rogers (of which I wrote earlier on this blog) had rejected the idea because of the absence of proton tracks "recoil" Shroud fibrils observed in the petrographic microscope.

    Other points you raised: the radiation should not be distributed, otherwise we would have a defined image without boundaries: on the contrary, only in the event of a radiation direction (perpendicular to each point of the "body" issuer) can provide an image similar to the Shroud. This last point was investigated by Prof Fanti years ago through finite element simulation.
    With regard to the hypothesis that radon is an Italian scholar is conducting experiments, not easy to collect useful data to support this hypothesis. She also spoke at the conference IWSA, see the articlehttp://www.acheiropoietos.info/proceedings/DeLisoWeb.pdf

    More information can be found in the second part of the article.

    • Nofex said:

      October 25th, 2011 at 13:46

      Thank you very much for the attention he is giving us all! She, with her passion for her work, is indeed an example to all researchers and also for those who make different crafts!

      • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

        October 25th, 2011 at 14:34

        Nofex, thank you for your comment, which allows me to clarify a point that is close to my heart.
        Disclosure is an integral part of my job. Both when I explain the physics of the color of the clouds, or how the coffee machine to middle school students, and when I write a blog on the Shroud image. I’m working, and is an aspect of the job that I really like! The satisfaction of transmitting to other ideas, proposals and knowledge is priceless, it gives me joy.
        Especially when the other side of the screen of the PC people are vogliose and curious … as in this case! There are over 170 comments in this blog and I did not think that the first part of my article would arouse so much interest: congratulations to all of you!

    • Klaus said:

      October 25th, 2011 at 15:47

      "Perpendicular to each point of the" body "issuer" or each point of the sheet receiving? because it seems to me that, in the first case, the radiation would disperse in all directions and would face the cloth second random angles producing a distorted and unreadable. But if I’m wrong I’ll be happy to clarify in this regard.

  32. Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

    October 25th, 2011 at 20:19

    Klaus, the correct answer is "perpendicular to each point of the emitting body."
    I try to explain why. So, let’s assume for a moment that is the VUV radiation emitted by the body that has colored the Shroud. We must keep in mind that we are talking VUV light, which means "vacuum ultraviolet" (Vacuum UltraViolet) just because it propagates in a vacuum but is absorbed from the air. Thus, the VUV photons that leave, for example, to the hip, have to travel several centimeters into the air before it reaches the linen cloth. So, most of the photons is absorbed from the air and does not arrive on linen. In the second part of the article we will see that to color the flax VUV radiation intensity must exceed a threshold, aldisotto of which the light colored linen. So the photons are absorbed more distance travel more and less is the effect of color.

    In conclusion, the VUV photons that have to travel several inches into the air before reaching the cloth are absorbed from the air and do not color, those who do not have to leave the road a light color, those who have to travel a few mm are absorbed and leave a little more intense color.
    For these reasons, the image is not distorted, because only the parts of the body close to have left a towel.
    I hope I was clear, but if I did not succeed, John Jackson has discussed in detail this issue in "1990 Jackson" in the bibliography of the article that this blog generates. I think it’s relatively easy to find on the internet.

  33. Klaus said:

    October 25th, 2011 at 21:22

    The answer is very clear, thanks. I look forward to reading the second part to better understand the issue of the intensity threshold.

    • lorenzo said:

      October 25th, 2011 at 21:38

      I do not understand: I thought I read that the color was more or less intense because of the greater or lesser amount of fibrils "colored."

      • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

        October 25th, 2011 at 22:04

        Lorenzo’s right, as you wrote it: the color and gradient depend on the different density of the fibrils colored aerolite, which has all the same shade of color.
        This is not inconsistent with my answer to the architect Klaus: only requires that the ‘intensity is higher than a tot and that the radiation has a spatial distribution of some particular … we’ll talk about in detail in the second part of the article (now it is almost ready)

  34. Peter said:

    October 26th, 2011 at 11:25

    I have another curiosity ‘:
    and ‘can devise an experiment to do in the place of burial, for example on the stone which was placed on the body, to see if the phenomenon that has impressed the flax has also left traces in the rock?
    Leaving course for the time being IMPOSSIBLE ‘to realize the practical experiment, a place to move a ladder barrel goes from blind!:(

    • Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

      October 28th, 2011 at 17:59

      Peter, now the experiments are carried out in laboratories equipped with the right tools. Visit us at Frascati and I’ll show you what this means in terms of power, dust filtration, high voltage cables, power supplies, and equipment size, etc..
      Carrying a modern laboratory in the crypt of the Holy Sepulchre is unthinkable, even if it were a easily accessible place.

  35. Theseus Anthony said:

    October 28th, 2011 at 15:59

    I think the Holy Shroud of Turin and the Holy Shroud of the Holy Face of Jesus are the true relics considered together because they fulfill the prophecy of Isaiah, "4 th song of the Servant: passion and glory – Is.52, 13-15 – ".
    God the Father would leave these two icons acheropite man, through the Holy Spirit, to be the prototypes for the inspirational sacred art about the appearance of Christ transfigured and disfigured. The painters and sculptors had to stick with a Canon dictated by the Church
    - From the provision adopted in the Council of Nicea Session VII of the DS 601 787 13 October – "When these images are most often covered, especially those who are led to contemplate the memories and the desire of the original model. "
    For the original model, absorbed in the one represented in the bundle of the Holy Mandylion, which included the sheet folded over with the cloth.

  36. Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

    October 28th, 2011 at 18:18

    Theseus, I respect his approach, but being a scientist, my first concern is to take a step back from her and try to "prove" if possible, that a picture is cheropita, or "made by human hands." If the current technology we can not, then and only then I can think and postulate that it is unpainted image, that is "not made ​​by human hand."
    Regarding the Shroud image, we are in a position to say that, so far, nobody has been able to reproduce it. So the suspicion that this is an unpainted picture is based. For the Veil of Manoppello, scientific knowledge is so scarce that it is impossible to draw any conclusions.
    Also for the Veil, it would be important to perform systematic measurements of non-destructive, similar to those STURP.

    • Theseus Anthony said:

      October 29th, 2011 at 09:07

      Dr. Di Lazzaro, she teaches me that the science is true because it is based only on strict demonstrations and not contradictory.
      For my studies I use the computer "which is a scientific instrument" and processing comparative scale of 1 to 1, between the image of the Holy Face and that of the Holy Face Shroud, it appears that in this figure are traced the folds with their points of intersection that are specific to the shroud of Manoppello. So when she sees the Shroud face is not doing nothing but watching the Manoppello filtered by a shroud of light from which is seen through the appearance of vague physical features of the face disfigured by the blood of Jesus’s Passion. That’s why this picture, if processed by computer, provides information in 3D.
      Invited by prof. P. Pfeiffer, years ago I attended a study day on the relic of Abruzzo and the Piedmont, held in Manoppello, and I observed the Holy Face in the electron microscope with a magnification of x 200 made ​​available for research by prof. Giulio Fanti. Well, tracked down a small cut in the cloth, displayed inside the image, procured by the many folds in history suffered.Within each broken thread of the cut do not experience color pictorial soaked by capillarity (the result of this test can be viewed in my blog with a lot of directions and then she tells me that the scientific knowledges about the Holy Face is scarce?
      Again .
      She is aware that the spaces defined by the horde and texture of fine linen, each of which corresponds in size to two or three hairs combined together is not covered by pigment filler substance with "collagen"?
      And again.
      You know that every figure is static, contrived also to changes in luminosity, while that of Manoppello is rather dynamic and can be seen in at least three different ways?
      And again.
      She knows the number that the figure of the Holy Face, when viewed against the light, disappears completely because the colors are not the body in the towel, and when seen through a panoramic background view there are no overlaps artificial tone bottom?
      I could go on for much to list them all unexplained peculiarities in the Holy Face, but I think to stop otherwise there would be too monotonous.

  37. Paolo Di Lazzaro said:

    October 29th, 2011 at 10:44

    Theseus, she raises several aspects of the Veil of Manoppello that deserve comment.
    I thank you for explaining the features backlit image, I’ve got to admire during my visit to the sanctuary with guides characteristics derived from very sparse texture of the fabric, which not coincidentally is called "veil." Thank you for having appointed Pfeiffer, a delightful person and learned. I am familiar with his ideas had a long discussion with him during the conference I organized last year in Frascati: http://www.acheiropoietos.info and http://www.acheiropoietos.info/proceedings/PfeifferWeb.pdf Thank you studies have also pointed out by Prof. Fanti, with whom I work since 2005 for research on the Shroud. Just Fanti told me that in its spectroscopic measurements found in Manoppello organic dyes on different sides of the veil, which does not bode well for the origin unpainted. But even excluding that, being able to deal with later additions to the pictorial image formation on the veil.The same Fanti considered essential to carry out many other optical measurements and taking a piece of wire in order to take some form of conclusion on the origin of the image on the Veil. Finally, the transparency of the overlap between the face of the Shroud and the Veil of Manoppello she claims to have studied by means of software, something I know having spoken at length with Sister Blandina, who for many years studying this kind of analogies and was the first to propose. Well, this kind of analogies, very suggestive, do not lead to conclusions of scientific value, because it is still at least partially subjective evaluations, so subject to our desire (conscious and unconscious) to see what we hope to see http:// it.wikipedia.org / wiki / pareidolia

Categories: Image Theory, Other Blogs
  1. cazab
    November 7, 2011 at 5:48 am

    Thanks. Good article. However, there is still one thing that puzzles me… Why Giulio Fanti and Paolo di Lazzaro have to my knowledge never mentioned Fazio’s peer-reviewed articles on the Turin Shroud?
    In 2011, Fazio an Mandaglio published two articles in Radiation Effects and Defects in Solids: Can a latent image explain the characteristics of the Shroud body image? ( http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10420150.2011.595413 ) and Stochastic distribution of the fibrils that yielded the Shroud of Turin body image. ( http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10420150.2011.566877 )
    At least, I hope that in his forthcoming paper for the JIST, Giulio does not ignore them.

  2. cazab
    November 8, 2011 at 3:42 am

    Thanks. Good article. However, there is still one thing that puzzles me… Why Giulio Fanti and Paolo di Lazzaro have to my knowledge never mentioned Fazio’s peer-reviewed articles on the Turin Shroud?
    In 2011, Fazio an Mandaglio published two articles in Radiation Effects and Defects in Solids: Can a latent image explain the characteristics of the Shroud body image? ( http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10420150.2011.595413 ) and Stochastic distribution of the fibrils that yielded the Shroud of Turin body image. ( http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10420150.2011.566877 )
    At least, I hope that in his forthcoming paper for the JIST, Giulio does not ignore them.

  3. Yannick Clément
    November 8, 2011 at 4:54 pm

    All those experiments prove only one thing : With those kind of lasers, you can make a coloration on linen that is pretty close to the Shroud coloration. That’s it. They will never be able to prove that the body of Jesus became a laser beam during resurrection !

    And one thing they never experiment (to my knowledge) is to create real 3D images of a body with those lasers… They never also said one word (to my knowledge) about what would be the effect of those lasers on real dried blood clots on a linen cloth (like we see on the Shroud and that were proven by STURP not to have been distrubed at all by the image formation process). They never also said one word on how easy or how tough it is to disolved the coloration. The STURP team were only able to disolved the coloration on the Shroud with very strong chemical reagents like diimide… If the color cannot be reduce with diimide, it’s not the same coloration process than the process that was active on the Shroud. On the contrary, if the color is much more easy to disolve with less stronger reagents, then, again, it’s not the same coloration process than the process that was active on the Shroud.

    The important thing to remember is this : coloring linen is easy. But that doesn’t mean the coloration process used is the same that the process responsible for the body images on the Shroud. I think more research and analyses needed to be done by M. Di Lazarro and his team. I’m very curious to know what would be the effect of diimide on the linen fibers that were colored by his lasers…

  4. Yannick Clément
    November 8, 2011 at 5:52 pm

    Another point of comparison that would be nice to analysed is the distance factor. We know from STURP that the darkest parts of the body images on the Shroud are those who were probably in direct contact with the body. We also know from STURP that beyond a distance of 4 cm, there is no body image at all. But also, the STURP team was able to determine that the color that reside on one single fiber possess the same degree of intensity (yellow straw color) no matter if the body was in direct contact with the Shroud or distant from it by less than 4 cm.

    So, I would like that M. Di Lazarro and his team show the results of those lasers on linen when the lasers are in direct contact with the cloth and compare the result when the lasers are 1 cm away from the cloth, 2 cm away, 3 cm away, 4 cm away, 5 cm away, etc., etc. I am curious to know if the results will be the same each time regarding the color intensity and also regarding the degree of penetration into the fiber…

    All those results would be nice to read in another scientific article. Then, we would have more data to judge if UV rays still can be considered as one potential candidate for the image formation process on the Shroud…

  1. No trackbacks yet.
Comments are closed.
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 561 other followers

%d bloggers like this: