given the possibility that I might have “egg on my face,”

In doing some preparatory work for a book I am thinking about writing this year, I reviewed John Jackson’s 2014 paper, “Is the image on the Shroud due to a process heretofore unknown to modern science?” That is when I came across something I hadn’t noticed before.

But before mentioning “the something” I hadn’t noticed, let me briefly summarize John’s paper beginning with his own words:

The concept of a cloth falling into the underlying body region and receiving an image, in essence, requires that two separate assumptions be made. First, we must assume that the body becomes mechanically “transparent” to its physical surroundings and, second, that a stimulus is generated that records the passage of the cloth through the body region onto the cloth as an image.

Jackson readily admits that as a physicist he has a problem with the concept. He should. We all should. That includes the non-scientists among us who love to watch magicians. Imagine a modern-day Houdini covering his assistant with a cloth and letting it fall through her body to the floor. It makes no sense; we understand the problem. Yet this is what Jackson wants us to imagine. Thus, this has become the most talked about and studied hypothesis that exists for how the images formed on the Shroud.

Mention ‘mechanical transparency,’ and scientists will swiftly delve into the intricate ballet of electrons, dictated by the peculiar laws of quantum mechanics, that underpins the solidity of matter. This principle is precisely why a burial shroud cannot simply pass through a human body. Despite atoms being largely empty space, a space teeming with latent energy, the Pauli Exclusion Principle establishes a fundamental rule: it prohibits electrons from occupying identical positions in space. This quantum mechanical rule ensures that matter maintains its structure and solidity, preventing objects from effortlessly passing through each other. Despite the vast, almost complete emptiness within atoms, a seemingly paradoxical void brimming with potential energy, only magicians and the special effects people in Hollywood can demonstrate this. Magic tricks are just tricks and nothing more; Miraculous action, beyond the realm of science, remains the sole way of doing so, or so it seems.

As for the images

Thus far, we have invoked image characteristics . . . to deduce the character of the collapse process and stimulus. The picture that results is that of a cloth-covered body that for some reason became mechanically transparent to its physical surroundings and, as it did so, emitted radiation from all points within and on the surface of the body. This radiation was highly absorbed in air. As the top part of the Shroud fell into the mechanically transparent body, the radiation began to interact with the cloth so as to produce a time integrated record of the cloth’s passage through the body region. This time record is what is commonly referred to as the “body image”. A diagram of this concept is shown and discussed in Appendix B.

Note: Due to fair use limitations related to copyrighted material, I am unable to display the diagram here. However, you can view it by accessing the paper directly. Please follow this link to the paper, and scroll to page 18, where you’ll find the diagram accompanied by useful explanatory notes.

In a separate forward to his paper, Jackson wrote the “something” I had previously missed.

. . . I would be remiss not to point out that the Radiation Fall-Through hypothesis predicts that, after the image formation event, the cloth would be collapsed on the ground with no physical body present.

No physical body present? I reread Jackson’s paper. Nothing! So I thought I would contact an old acquaintance, a now-retired theoretical physicist who used to work in a major corporation’s quantum computing research labs. “Remember, don’t mention my name in the same sentence as the Shroud of Turin.” he admonished. “People already think I am crazy.”

“That’s okay because I’m not going to ask anyone to believe anything you say, anyway.” I paused and took a deep breath. “Remember our conversation from a few years ago about the hypothesis that the body of Jesus becomes mechanically transparent and the burial shroud fell through it?” I said.

“I’ve tried to forget,” he laughingly replied. 

“Well, I just noticed something the author, John Jackson, says that I hadn’t noticed before.  He writes, in a separate document, “I would be remiss not to point out that the Radiation Fall-Through hypothesis predicts that, after the image formation event, the cloth would be collapsed on the ground with no physical body present.”

“Yeah, and?”

“What happened to the body?”

“Being mechanically transparent, gravity would have pulled it into the earth.”

“Are you sure?”

“Given that mechanical transparency is impossible and undefined in the real world, of course not. What captures my attention instead is the small white ball nestled in the grass, waiting for the moment I smack it with my new, highly polished, perfectly balanced Titleist TSR3 [ = a golf club]. My contemplations on gravity are reserved solely for the fairway, where it guides the ball in a flawless arc, ensuring it lands precisely in the center of the green, maybe even in the hole. I’m retired. Go ask ChatGPT. See what it thinks. Call me back in a couple of days if it’s raining.”

What happened? What is it that we don’t understand about mechanical transparency? Is the mechanically transparent body subject to gravity? I hadn’t thought of that.

Unable to find anyone else beyond the world of the Shroud with the scientific wherewithal necessary to examine Jackson’s paper objectively I decided to ask ChatGPT if it could do so (Version 4 as of February 1, 2024, from OpenAI). Here is its assessment of Jackson’s proposal after I asked it what happened to the body.

ChatGPT wrote:

To explore what would happen to a human body that defies the laws of nature by becoming “mechanically transparent,” we can consider a thought experiment. This scenario assumes the body does not interact physically with the matter of the Earth (ignoring the practical impossibility), but gravity still affects it.

  1. Acceleration Due to Gravity: Initially, the body would accelerate downwards due to gravity. The acceleration would be approximately 9.8 m/s^2 at the surface.
  2. Increasing Temperature and Pressure: As the body descends, it would encounter increasing temperature and pressure. However, given the premise of mechanical transparency, we assume these factors do not affect the body. In reality, the temperature increases by about 25°C per kilometer of depth, and pressure increases significantly, but these are ignored in this hypothetical scenario.
  3. Velocity Approaches Maximum: The body would continue to accelerate until it reaches the center of the Earth, where the gravitational pull from all directions is equal. The acceleration would decrease as the body approaches the center because the gravitational force decreases; gravity inside the Earth is proportional to the mass of the spherical shell that is at a radius greater than the object’s distance from the center. At the center, theoretically, there would be no net gravitational force.
  4. Passing Through the Center: Upon reaching the center, the body would have its maximum velocity. As it moves past the center to the other side, it would start decelerating because the gravitational pull from the opposite side of the Earth starts slowing it down.
  5. Oscillation: If we ignore air resistance and assume the body doesn’t lose energy to heat or any other form of energy, it would oscillate back and forth through the Earth, from one side to the other. This oscillation would continue indefinitely in a perfect vacuum.
  6. Heat of the Earth’s Core: In reality, the heat and pressure of the Earth’s core, reaching up to about 5,700 K (similar to the surface of the Sun), would destroy any known material. However, since the premise includes mechanical transparency, we assume the body is not affected by heat or pressure.

In summary, in this thought experiment where a human body is unaffected by heat, pressure, or physical interactions with Earth’s matter, it would oscillate indefinitely from one side of the Earth to the other. The concept of being “consumed by the heat of Earth’s core” doesn’t apply due to the hypothetical condition of mechanical transparency. This scenario, while fascinating as a thought experiment, defies the laws of physics as we understand them.

Going back to the Forward, wherein Jackson asks:

If we were to regard the recorded observations of the Easter Tomb of Jesus found in the Christian Gospels as providing such observational data, then we find direct agreement with the above prediction of the Radiation Fall-Through hypothesis, i.e. a collapsed cloth and no body.

Yes, but only if we can make a gigantic leap of faith into a land of make-believe. I felt compelled to ask ChatGPT a follow-up question.

Me to the chatbot:

What could possibly interrupt this destiny? I am assuming the body is that of Jesus Christ and that he must be available, in some form, for various post-resurrection appearances.

ChatGPT responded:

Incorporating the premise that the body is that of Jesus Christ, with the unique attributes ascribed to Him in Christian theology, including post-resurrection appearances, introduces several factors that could alter the described scenario:

  1. Divine Intervention: The primary factor that could interrupt or alter the destiny of Jesus Christ’s body falling through the Earth is divine intervention. According to Christian belief, Jesus possesses divine attributes and capabilities, including authority over nature and the physical laws of the universe. His post-resurrection body is described as glorified and not bound by physical limitations that affect ordinary human bodies.
  2. Post-Resurrection Appearances: The New Testament accounts describe Jesus appearing to His disciples and others in various locations after His resurrection. These appearances are integral to Christian faith, showcasing His victory over death and His divine nature. For Jesus to make these appearances, He would not be confined to continuous physical movement, such as falling through the Earth, as His resurrected body transcends normal physical constraints.
  3. Transcendence of Physical Laws: The resurrected body of Jesus, as described in biblical accounts, is not subject to the same physical laws as our current bodies. This means that scenarios involving natural physics, such as being pulled by gravity through the Earth, would not apply in the same way. Jesus’ ability to appear, disappear, and move between locations without regard to physical barriers or distances suggests a level of control over physical reality that would prevent any involuntary or continuous physical process from hindering His divine mission or post-resurrection appearances.
  4. Theological Considerations: From a theological perspective, the mission and presence of Jesus Christ are guided by divine will and purpose. His appearances and actions after the resurrection are for specific purposes, such as reassuring, teaching, and commissioning His disciples. These actions reflect a deliberate and sovereign control over His presence and interactions, rather than being subject to passive physical processes.

In summary, when considering the unique nature of Jesus Christ’s resurrected body according to Christian theology, the scenario of falling through the Earth would not apply as it would for a regular human body. His post-resurrection appearances, as recorded in the New Testament, demonstrate a transcendence over physical limitations and a purpose-driven presence that would preclude any such continuous physical destiny.

In other words, philosophically and theologically, full immersion into the realm is miraculous — I thus felt compelled to ask another question:

Me to the chatbot:

Given that the purpose of becoming mechanically transparent was to allow for the formation of an image on Jesus’ burial cloth, was there not a more parsimonious way to accomplish this?

ChatGPT responded:

The idea of Jesus’ body becoming “mechanically transparent” to allow for the formation of an image on the burial cloth, such as the Shroud of Turin, is a speculative and non-traditional explanation for how the image might have been formed. Traditional Christian beliefs and the accounts given in the New Testament do not describe the process of the image formation on the burial cloth in such physical terms. The formation of the image, if one assumes it to be authentically linked to Jesus, is typically viewed through the lens of miraculous or divine action rather than a physical process understandable by current scientific knowledge.

Considering a more parsimonious (simpler or more straightforward) way to accomplish the formation of an image on a burial cloth, from a theological perspective, one might argue that any direct divine action could be considered parsimonious. In Christian theology, God’s actions, including those attributed to Jesus’ resurrection, are not bound by human understanding of physics or necessity for mechanisms that fit within our scientific understanding. Thus, a miraculous imprinting of the image by divine power, at the moment of resurrection or through an act of divine will, would be seen as entirely consistent with the nature of miracles as described in biblical accounts.

The notion of parsimony in the context of miracles, especially those associated with Jesus, is different from its application in scientific explanations. Miracles, by their nature, are considered acts of God that supersede natural laws. Therefore, the most straightforward explanation for believers is that the image was created through a miraculous act rather than through a complex process that would require Jesus’ body to have specific physical properties like mechanical transparency.

In summary, within Christian thought, the creation of an image on Jesus’ burial cloth would be attributed to divine action or miracle rather than a physical process requiring explanation by natural laws. This view emphasizes the power and sovereignty of God over the material world, making the concept of mechanical transparency unnecessary from a theological standpoint.

And thus, I wondered about the definition of “mechanically transparent.” Jackson proposes that the body “becomes mechanically ‘transparent’ to its physical surroundings. That seems simple enough. The context comes from a two-word phrasal verb: falls through. My golf-playing friend and I assumed that meant in defiance of the Pauli Exclusion Principle.”  But is it that simple? What if we said the body was transparent to gravity, inertia, etc.? What happens then?

Jackson had pondered, “The major problem with the hypothesis is, of course, to explain why a human body would behave in such a manner.”

What manner is that: being transparent to solid matter, thus allowing the cloth to fall through, which is, of course, the original context? But what if transparent also means being unaffected by gravity? Would that mean somehow masking gravity, or would it mean without mass? Does something without mass even exist as a physical entity? Without mass would also mean that inertia must cease. And so I raised the question of gravity and inertia with ChatGPT.

ChatGPT responded:

Yes, your restated question elaborates on an intriguing hypothetical scenario with a body that becomes both massless and mechanically transparent, defying our current understanding of physics and existing beyond known natural phenomena. Let’s break down the implications of this scenario:

  1. Existence Beyond Natural Phenomena: If a body becomes massless and mechanically transparent without converting to energy explosively, it indeed suggests a state of existence that transcends our current scientific framework. This transformation implies an interaction with the physical world that is not accounted for by the known laws of physics, leading us to speculate about realms of existence beyond our empirical comprehension.
  2. Loss of Inertia with Earth’s Rotation: Theoretically, a massless body would not possess inertia. Inertia is a property of matter that describes its resistance to changes in motion. A massless entity, by definition, would not have this resistance. Since the Earth rotates at roughly 1000 miles per hour at the equator, a body that suddenly becomes massless—and therefore is not subject to gravitational forces or the inertia that keeps everything on the Earth’s surface moving with the Earth—might appear to move or be “left behind” by the rotating Earth, in theory.
  3. Movement Through the Tomb’s Walls: Given the hypothetical absence of inertia and mechanical transparency, such a body would theoretically not be anchored by (sic to?) the Earth’s rotation or interact with physical barriers, including the walls of a tomb. Thus, it could be perceived as moving through these barriers at a speed relative to the Earth’s rotation. However, this motion would be a result of the Earth moving while the body remains stationary relative to space, rather than the body actively moving at high speed.
  4. Radiation as a Means of Image Formation: The concept that radiation could imprint an image on a cloth is reminiscent of photographic processes where light or other forms of electromagnetic radiation affect photosensitive material to create an image. In this context, if the body emitted a form of radiation capable of interacting with the fibers of the burial cloth, it could theoretically alter the cloth’s properties in a way that forms an image.
  5. Compatibility with Masslessness and Transparency: If the body is massless and mechanically transparent, traditional physical interactions like touch or gravity would not apply. However, radiation does not require mass to propagate; electromagnetic radiation, for example, travels through the vacuum of space. Therefore, a body emitting radiation could still affect its surroundings without needing to physically interact with them in the conventional sense.
  6. Types of Radiation and Image Formation: The nature of the radiation would be crucial in determining the feasibility of this mechanism. For instance, ultraviolet (UV) light, X-rays, or other forms of electromagnetic radiation could have different effects on the cloth, depending on their wavelengths, intensities, and the cloth’s properties. The specific characteristics of the radiation would influence the sharpness, detail, and overall appearance of the image.
  7. Scientific Plausibility: While the idea is speculative and not supported by current scientific evidence, it introduces a creative hypothesis for how an image might be formed under extraordinary circumstances. This would still require a form of energy emission from the body, which contradicts the massless aspect unless we consider energy forms not yet understood by science.
  8. Historical and Theological Context: In discussions about the Shroud of Turin, which some believe to be the burial cloth of Jesus, various hypotheses have been proposed about how the image was formed, including radiation. However, there is no consensus or conclusive scientific evidence supporting a specific mechanism. The suggestion that radiation from a miraculous event could create such an image bridges faith and science in exploring this mystery.

Your hypothetical scenario invites us to consider the limits of our understanding of physics and the potential for phenomena that exist beyond the observable universe as currently understood. It stimulates imaginative exploration into the nature of existence and the parameters that define our interaction with the physical world.

Me to the chatbot:

So after all of our recent discussions, why do you think John Jackson wrote: “I would be remiss not to point out that the Radiation Fall-Through hypothesis predicts that, after the image formation event, the cloth would be collapsed on the ground with no physical body present.”

ChatGPT Responded:

The suggestion that the cloth might have been “pulled into the earth by gravity given that it was mechanically transparent” introduces a speculative physical mechanism into the discussion about the image formation on the Shroud of Turin, particularly in the context of the Radiation Fall-Through hypothesis. This idea seems to further explore the nature of the hypothetical event leading to the image’s formation, suggesting an interaction between physical laws and the extraordinary conditions posited by the hypothesis.

In physics, “mechanical transparency” is not a standard term; thus, interpreting this statement requires some speculation. It seems to imply a condition where the cloth, due to the unique circumstances of the event (such as a miraculous occurrence or an unknown physical process), might not resist gravitational forces in a conventional manner. This could be understood as suggesting that the cloth could move or collapse in ways not predicted by standard physics, possibly due to the hypothesized radiation or energy involved in the image formation process.

This interpretation attempts to reconcile the physical behavior of the cloth with the extraordinary conditions assumed by the hypothesis. It suggests that the mechanisms behind the image formation could involve not only unconventional sources of radiation but also unique interactions with physical forces like gravity.

However, it’s important to note that this discussion enters the realm of speculative physics, especially when considering miraculous or supernatural explanations within a scientific framework. The scientific community requires empirical evidence and reproducible results to validate hypotheses, and the theories concerning the Shroud of Turin, including the Radiation Fall-Through hypothesis, are subject to debate and skepticism due to the lack of direct evidence and the challenge of fitting them within established scientific principles.

Therefore, while such discussions can be fascinating and stimulate interdisciplinary dialogue between science, theology, and history, they remain speculative without concrete empirical evidence to support the specific mechanisms proposed.

Of course, I will write to John and ask him. But first, given the possibility that I might have “egg on my face,” I’d like to ask the blog, “What have I missed?”