Late addition (July 2019)
Please forgive this postscript, correction, “prescript”, correction, intrusion, added many years later – based on some 350 and more postings here and elsewhere.
That’s including some 7 years of my hands-on investigation into image-forming techniques, chosen to be credible with simple, indeed crude, medieval (14th century) technology etc etc.
(Oh, and yes, I accept the radiocarbon dating, despite it being restricted to a single non-random corner sample, making all the oh-so-dismissive, oh-so-derogatory statistics-based sniping totally irrelevant – a ranging shot being just that me dears- a single ranging shot, albeit subdivided into three for Arizona, Oxford and Zurich).
Sindonology (i.e. the “science” , read pseudoscience – of the so-called “Shroud ” of Turin) can be simply summed up. It’s a re-branding exercise, one designed to pretend that the prized Turin possession is not just J of A’s “fine linen”, described in the biblical account as used to transport a crucified body from cross to tomb.
Oh no, it goes further, much further, way way beyond the biblical account. How? By making out that it was the SAME linen as that described in the Gospel of John, deployed as final “burial clothes”. Thus the description “Shroud” for the Turin Linen, usually with the addition “burial shroud”. Why the elision of two different linens, deployed for entirely different purposes (transport first, then final interment)?
Go figure! Key words to consider are: authentic relic v manufactured medieval icon; mystique, peaceful death-repose, unlimited opportunity for proposing new and ever more improbable image-formation mechanisms etc. How much easier it is to attach the label “Holy” to Shroud if seen as final burial clothes, in final at-peace repose – prior to Resurrection- as distinct from a means of temporary swaying side-to-side transport in an improvised makeshift stretcher !
As I say, a rebranding exercise (transport to final burial shroud) and a very smart and subtle one at that . Not for nothing did that angry local Bishop of Troyes suddenly refer to a “sleight of hand” after allegedly accepting it when first displayed. Seems the script was altered, or as some might say, tampered with! It might also explain why there were two Lirey badges, not just one. Entire books could be written on which of the two came first… I think I know which, with its allusion (?) to the Veil of Veronica… yes, there are alternative views (the face above “SUAIRE” a visual link to the face-only display of the Linen as the “Image of Edessa” or as that on the then current “Shroud” per se.
Face shown (left) on mid- 14th century Machy Mould (recently discovered variant of the Lirey Pilgrim Badge) above the word “SUAIRE” (allegedly meaning “shroud”). Inset image on the right: one version among many of the fabled “Veil of Veronica” image. I say the two are related, and deliberately so, but this is not the time or place to go into detail.
No, NOT a resurrectional selfie, but instead a full size version of, wait for it, the legendary VEIL OF VERONICA , product of inital body contact – no air gaps- between body and fabric, but with one important difference. The Turin image was intended to look more realistic, less artistic.
How? By displaying a negative tone-reversed image implying IMPRINT (unless, that is, you’re a modern day sindonologist, in which case ‘resurrectional proto-photographic selfie” becomes the preferred, nay, vigorously proferred explanation assisted by unrestrained imagination, creation of endless pseudoscience etc etc, with resort to laser beams, corona discharges, nuclear physics, elementary particles, earthquakes etc etc – the list is seemingly endless!
Welcome to modern day sindonology.
Personally, I prefer no-nonsense feet-on-the-ground hypothesis-testing science, aided by lashings of, wait for it, plain down-to-earth common sense.
Start of original posting:
The energy source of the Corona Discharge responsible for the superficial image on the Shroud of Turin has been investigated by a multidisciplinary team, comprising myself, a quantum physicist (my next door neighbour, still, inexplicably, “between jobs”), 3 philosophers (from my local, currently the Bull and Bush until I am allowed back in the Kings Head) and a theologian (my retired RE teacher, now 93 and as mentally inert as ever).
Here is a draft summary of our conclusions:
The starting point was the recent confirmation at CERN of the fleeting existence of the Higgs boson, aka the God particle, responsible for conferring mass. We believe that in first century Palestine there was an anti-matter particle corresponding to the Higgs boson which we call the Son of God particle. The special location of Palestine in relation to tectonic plate boundaries and their associated magnetic field allowed the Son of God (SOG) particle to have a brief existence which we estimate to be 33+/-1.5 years. The SOG particle may have had additional protection from matter/antimatter mutual annihilation by residing within a protective neurological circuitry, like that of a specially-configured man or woman’s cranial grey matter (more likely the former where it is less likely to be destabilised by hormonal influences corresponding approximately with the lunar cycles). We believe there was an additional protective force field provided by a number of separate but like-minded neuronal entities, also specially-and synchronistically-configured, and again, probably blokes, the precise number of which is conjectural, but which we estimate as 12+/- 0, and which in common parlance are referred to as “disciples”.
The stabilising environment could not survive for long following the death of the host, probably not more than 1.5+/- 0.75 days. There then occurred one God Almighty flash, aka Corona Discharge, as God particles mutually annihilated Son-of-God particles to create a new transient metastable entity that we call the Wholly Ghost-form of matter and energy. So for a brief instant in time that we estimate as 1.75+/- 63.6 picoseconds there existed the God particle, the Son of God particle and the Wholly Ghost (think Schrodinger’s Cat, or maybe his Cat-and-Kitten, or better still, nobody or everybody’s Virtual Cat-and-Kitten). All matter from within a putative burial shroud then disappeared, leaving just a faint scorch on the fabric. There is an important spy clue, linking that cloth to what is presently stored under glass in Turin Cathedral, namely a reversed 3 on the forehead. That was of course a right-way-round 3 on the subject, and clearly represents a signature of our postulated trinity of quantised energy states – or “Wholly Trinity” for short (or Tendentious Trio as a Jewish friend of mine once described it, espousing his distinctively purist and uncompromising brand of monotheism, the latter being an older now obsolescing term for Monoclonal Unitary Quantum Theology).
We obviously intend to publish these ideas in a peer-reviewed journal – namely our local Hobbington Gazette that is perused by – among others – my good friend Lord Pennypinch of Crumbling Manor. He, living nearby in Nether Hobbington-under-Couchgrass, and not just a Peer of the Realm, oh no, but someone whose sole retainer comes round to borrow my grass strimmer from time to time, can always be relied upon to provide a fast and reliable peer-review process of all we submit to refereeing (followed in short order by referring to the aforementioned journal’s Editor – someone who is occasionally invited to shoot rabbits, pheasants and other vermin on the Lord’s land) especially if the script is accompanied by a bottle of his favourite single malt . The latter, while strictly not necessary, and still of questionable probity where the new theology is concerned, is, we have found, guaranteed to put our local worthy in a favourable analytical frame of mind when dealing with the complexities and subtleties of our cutting-edge, well, somewhat abrasive brand of Quantum Theology ensuring rapid publication). Yes, every one of our submissions to the Gazette has been peer-reviewed. I am minded to describe the review process as peerless, whilst recognizing that might seem to some contradiction in terms, but then it’s quantum theology that is in the frame here, an area in which self-contradiction is not only to be expected but positively welcomed. In fact it could be negatively welcomed as well, that too being as an equally valid solution for acceptance in quantum theology. But I’ll spare you the details since it involves some quite complex mathematics (we have invited our local turf accountant to develop some equations on it, and more importantly, inequations, he being the acknowledged expert in this neck of the woods on all matters relating to probability and statistics). Remember, in quantum theology, 2 + 2 can equal 5 (for large values of 2) …
See also the following paper (abstract only) that agrees with me that the Shroud image was produced by a Corona Discharge (while omitting to specify where the energy came from):
G. Fanti1 L. Matordes1 V. Amoruso2 M. Bullo1 F. Lattarulo2 G. Pesavento1
1Dip. di Ingegneria Industriale, Università di Padova, Padova, Italy
2Politecnico di Bari, Bari, Italy
Good try, chaps, but you never quite managed the quantum leap in thinking that led to our Hobbingtonian Corona Discharge model.
Maybe you should stop drinking that Moretti beer and instead try the real ale down at my Hobbington local. After a pint or two you won’t just find yourselves on a different planet, as you are at present, but an entirely different GALAXY….
Update: 30th October 2012. You’ll find a highly derivative version of these stunning new insights in today’s Mail: 😉