Site banner: see how a simulated sweat imprint (my wet hand pressed down onto dark fabric) responds magnificently to 3D-rendering computer software (ImageJ) before and after tone-reversal (negative back to positive image). Remind you of anything? Like those supposedly “unique” and “encoded” 3D-properties of the Shroud of Turin body image? For a more realistic aged/yellowed sweat imprint, see the many postings on this site since 2014 obtained with the aid of my Model 10 (imprinting off parts, notably head and hands, of a real body (mine!) onto linen with white wheaten flour, followed by heat-development of the image to generate carbon-based and thus bleachable straw-coloured melanoidins via Maillard reactions between wheat proteins and reducing sugars).
I did consider calling my new revised model for simulating the Turin Shroud “Model 11”, but then thought better of it. It still uses my domestic oven as a more convenient indoor model for a medieval bed of hot charcoal. But I’ve switched from using the fan heater at the back of the oven (with its inconspicuous electric element which scarcely glows, if at all) with the incandescent overhead grill with no fan operating.
The emphasis as regards theory now switches from convected heat (hot air, requiring prolonged heating up to 180-200 degrees C for optimal colour-development to RADIATED HEAT from the visibly red-hot element, producing a much, MUCH quicker result.
But it’s still essentially Model 10 (development of a flour imprint on wet linen in a hot oven – probably over a charcoal fire too).
Distinguishing between effects of radiated heat from those of heated air is easy, as shown in the following experiments performed earlier today, a crucial one I believe (time will tell).
Here’s a series of photos. To say I was truly gobsmacked when opening the door of the oven after a few minutes would be a huge understatement. My head’s still spinning!
Fig. 1 : Sprinkle dry white flour onto hand. No precoating with vegetable oil (see later for reasons).
Fig.2: Place flour imprints flour-side up or down onto an aluminium-foil lined baking tray (1 and 4 up, counting from left; 2 and 3 down).
Fig 3. Lay a second sheet of aluminium foil on top with cut squares. Add thin strips of extra foil to give a mix of exposed/non-exposed flour imprints. (The overlay of foil is designed to protect from direct radiant heat from incandescent top element).
Fig.4: Rapid appearance of brown colour in the exposed regions of flour-imprint (apols for blurred picture ). Would have stopped the experiment sooner if I’d known how fast the colour develops before any visible change on the oven thermometer (<60 degrees C).
Fig.5: Remove from oven. Even at this stage, before removing foil, it was clear that the foil, where present, had completely protected the underlying flour imprint. Only the foil-free regions had colour.
Fig.6: partial removalof foil, revealing protected, non-coloured flour imprints.
Fig.7 : compete removal of foil, revealing the protected v non-protected areas, corresponding with the foil pattern.
Fig.8: each strip has now been turned over, revealing colour on the REVERSE side of flour imprinted linen (think SECOND FACE – see preceding post that triggered this new experimental approach based on radiant heat, though pioneered in my Model 1 from December 2011 – charcoal-sensitized “thermostencilling” albeit with a different source of radiant heat – an incandescent electric light bulb).
Hunch: I strongly suspect that the colour development I’ve been seeing these last 2 years with Model 10 is the result of WEAK radiant heat (“infrared”) from the element associated with the fan at the back of the oven, which explains why the best colour development on the reverse side of the linen was seen when it, not the imprint side) faced TOWARDS the fan.
More to come…
Friday July 14th
Have just this minute entered (infrared microwave oven difference) into a certain search engine. (Yup, the same one one that has blacklisted this site from its default ‘Any Time’ listings, failing to respond to my protests via its ‘Feedback’ facility, despite giving my email address).
Here’s what one reads inside the box at the top of the page:
Both infrared and microwave oven shoot energy waves into the food being cooked. Infrared ovens cook the food from the outside in, whereas microwaves cook from the inside out.
Yes, that would make sense. Infrared radiation is absorbed by molecules generally, specific wavelengths causing particular chemical bonds to stretch, bend, vibrate etc.faster, whereas microwaves (longer wavelength than infrared) are absorbed by water molecules specifically, causing them to spin (as I recall). Must find time between experiments to refresh my memory on stuff I haven’t read about for years, probably decades.
What to do as a follow-up to yesterday’s experiment? A repeat methinks, but with progress checks every half minute or so to follow the time-course of the initial highly superficial and hopefully Shroud-relevant ‘toasting’, taking samples at intervals for examination under my new stereomicroscope. (The latter is proving its worth with its ability to view thick specimens via incident rather than transmitted light, its powerful top illumination and large separation between sample and objective lens.
More to follow.
It would take too long to summarize today’s experiments – and I’m beginning to question the need to present data – warts an’ all – when there’s scarcely any feedback – certainly not from authenticity-promoting sindonology.
So I’ll content myself with articulating the hypotheses that are now under consideration, as a result of moving Model 10 away from all-enveloping convected hot air to highly directional radiant heat.
First, I now consider that flour imprinting of part or all of a naked human body onto wet linen required no more than a light dusting with flour, with no need for vegetable oil precoating.
Second, image development required only light toasting of the imprint over a bed of hot charcoal, the latter emitting mainly infrared radiation, aka radiant heat.
Thirdly, there’s a distinct possibility that while the imprinted side of the linen faced down towards the source of radiation for image-development, the desired image formed in fact on the OPPOSITE side of the fabric, making it easier for the craftsmen to monitor progress and decide when to cease applying heat. But if colour formation was deemed insufficient, re-heating from cold was a permissible option. So what we call an almost imperceptible ‘second face’ on the Shroud might perhaps be the first face – or rather, what remains of the imprinted image after washing. The faint, highly superficial fuzzy body image we associate with the Shroud may in fact be the true “second face/body”, owing at least some of its subtlety to being a reverse-side image.
Infrared radiation can easily penetrate linen to produce a reverse side image.
Saturday July 15
If it’s a pithy summary you seek of this investigator’s 5.5 years of research, through 10 model systems, then think of the Shroud’s body image as a ‘toastograph’. The thermal development is essentially no different from that which takes place when you place a slice of bread in an electric toaster. The radiated (infrared) heat from the hot element initiates Maillard browning reactions between the flour’s chemically-reactive reducing sugars with their potential aldehyde functions and amino-groups in proteins etc. I can think of no a priori grounds for thinking that the cellulose or other constituents of the linen fibres are chemically involved, at least initially, given that one can brown the flour imprint selectively white retaining an essentially white linen background. The linen does gradually darken, needless to say, but the flour imprint by then is dark brown or black, so of no relevance to the subtle straw-colour of the Shroud body image.
Sunday July 16
We live in a modern-day world that is largely concerned only with simple take-home messages, and not interested in knowing the detailed data upon which claims – all too often wild and unsubstantiated – are based (a sad state of affairs that sustains so much of pseudo-scientific sindonology).
So there’s no point in my continuing to post the details of current experimentation. All that does is distract from the simple message that is now emerging from 5+ years of investigation, summarised today a new tagline next to the blog title. (Google curiously – and some say perversely- picks up on one’s taglines while ignoring the title of each new posting). Note the reference to the Shroud body image as a “toastograph“! 😉
So I’ll just briefly explain in words what I’m doing, which involves use of a new research tool that is paying dividends.
The task has been to investigate the coloration of individual fibres, to see whether or not the model system replicates the reported properties of Shroud image fibres (“half-tone effect”, discontinuities, striations etc). But there’s a problem. First, if one generates an authentic-looking Shroud image that is faint, almost to the point of invisibility, then there’s precious little colour to see in the fabric threads, never mind the fibres that comprise each thread. There’s a second problem: the fibres are bunched together in each thread, making it well nigh impossible to determine if any weak yellow colour is in the fibre, or maybe restricted to the capillary channels between the fibres.
There’s a solution: before imprinting one abrades (“roughs up”) part of what is destined to be the reverse side of the fabric with an emery board. On then imprints with flour onto the wet linen, with or without oil (the need for which is still being assessed), toasts under the oven’s incandescent top element, and then look at the abraded rucked-up fibres on the reverse side.
What does on find? Answer: individual fibres, separated from their neighbours, that are faint yellow in colour which conveniently “stick out” from the plane of the fabric. The colour does indeed appear to be INSIDE individual fibres. In other words, the chromophore (yellow pigment), whatever it is, appears to be able to travel inside individual fibres, not just between them, reinforcing an earlier suggestion here that capillary transport is not just between fibres, but between the microfibrils of cellulose inside fibres.
Incidentally, on a different matter, if anyone is thinking of deploying their own domestic oven in infrared mode (top element), then here’s a tip. Don’t sit your linen sample on the oven grid or metal trays etc. Remove all the horizontal metal, and replace with suspended support nettimg of some description (mine’s made of knotted string). Unlike metal, string does not reflect infrared rays appreciably, nor conduct away locally-generated heat. One gets a thermal imprint without the aberrations that accompany metal obstructions, whether above or below the linen.
Our medieval artisans who manufactured the Shroud presumably held their imprinted linen sample horizontally over a bed of glowing charcoal embers, close enough to see the image develop gradually – mainly I suspect via infrared rays at a distance – but not too close to risk possible complications from currents of superheated air rising by convection.
Monday 17th July
In keeping with my new policy of minimal reporting of hard data, maximal reporting of (questionable) take-home story, as per mainstream sindonology, here’s today’s chief result.
I’ve heavily loaded dry white flour onto an oil-free hand, imprinted onto partially-ABRADED wet linen, both sides, then exposed imprint-side DOWN to the fierce infrared radiation that comes off the glowing element in the roof of my home oven.
Result: a wonderful crop of deeply yellow or yellow -brown fibres that ‘stick up’ out of the plane of the linen on the preferentially ir-exposed toasted side, opposite from the imprinted side.
Conclusion: Infrared (radiant heat) energy absorbed by the flour imprint on the underside of the linen can generate a chromophore-containing ‘thermal cocktail’, one that is able to travel via INDIVIDUAL FIBRES to the opposite side of the weave, and then continue to creep up individual fibres, presumably via the latter’s internal microstructure (presumably channels between intra-fibre cellulose microfibrils). There is no need to invoke capillary transport via the much larger channels that exist between fibres.
Those who doubt the role played by radiant heat (infrared rays) in the newly revised Model 10 need only slide a metal tray into the oven above the imprinted linen to see the dramatic effect of interposing metal between radiant heat source and imprint. Image development is then exceedingly slow, dependent on transfer of thermal energy via convection currents of slowly-heated ai , supplemented no doubt by weak reflected ir rays off walls of oven etc as distinct from intense straight line radiation that travels from incandescent top oven element to chemically-susceptible target on the imprinted linen.
The current model is a lot more ‘friendly’ needless to say to a medieval forgery scenario, one deploying radiant heat from red-hot charcoal embers. The weak visible radiation (orange or red) is irrelevant: what matters is the much larger amount of infrared radiation that is absorbed by the superficial flour imprint , initiating THERMOchemical change (caramelization, Maillard reactions) and (probably) briefly liquified chromophore release. The latter is then able (being a liquid) to permeate and penetrate the interior of linen fibres via microcapillaries to the opposite side of the fabric, producing a reverse-side image that is more or less prominent, depending on precise experimental conditions.
Possibly more to come…
Tuesday July 18
My oh my – that new T word of mine has entered the English language just now – albeit on Page 9 of a UK Google search under (shroud of turin)!
It’ll be taboo at the Pasco proceedings this week, needless to say. Anyone so much as muttering it under his or her breath risks being forcibly ejected from the big tent, correction, giant shed…
This going to sound terribly cocky and arrogant, but it has to be said all the same. This investigator reckons he’s finally home and dry as regards the nature of the body image on the Turin Shroud. Yes, it’s an, er, ‘TOASTOGRAPH’, requiring radiant heat, i.e. infrared rays, travelling in straight lines at a nifty 186,000 miles per second, to colour up a flour imprint on wet linen. Infrared rays “cook” , from the outside in, as already stated, so the explanation for image superficiality is immediately supplied.
Model 10, with its novel introduction of flour as imprinting agent (not too different from Ray Rogers’ starch) was first announced here and on Dan Porter’s now retired site some 2 years ago. So what took so long to give it the final ‘infrared’ tweak? Answer: this investigator is a biochemist by training. Physics, certainly not radiation physics has never been his strongest suit. So when I adopted the kitchen oven as a means of developing the flour imprints, clicking the switch round to noisy fan heater mode, seeing the fan spin on the back wall of the oven with no sign of a glowing electric element I made the assumption that the energy input was in the form of forced convection of hot air, that the energy received by the flour imprint was in the form of fast moving air molecules, physical atom-to-atom collision etc etc. It took 2 years of puzzling the now-you-see-it-now-you don’t reverse side image to realize that was NOT the prime mechanism, and indeed may play little if any significant role, that the coloration of the flour, and the generation of the reverse side “second face” was dependent on an invisible component of the electromagnetic spectrum, namely radiant heat (infrared) emanating from an none-too-obvious inbuilt ‘dark’ electric element tucked away behind the rotating fan that was emitting infrared radiation in quantity, but not visibly so through not being visibly red hot.
My Model 1, from end December 2011, also relied upon radiated infrared heat (plus intense visible white light) from a spotlight in the ceiling – using painted-on charcoal slurry to act as heat trap and sensitizer. Never in a million years did I imagine that something essentially white – wheaten flour – could take the place of charcoal, and be imprinted onto linen as a dry powder, as distinct from being applied with a paint brush.
So we now have a new radiation model, one that will now have to compete for attention with the more exotic ones being presented this week at Pasco, Washington State by Mark Antonacci, Bob Rucker, Paolo di Lazzaro etc.
The key difference of course is that my radiation is incident on a flour imprint, whereas theirs is emitted via processes unknown to conventional physics from a certain recently deceased VIP, the founder of Christianity, undergoing a unique resurrection event. Theirs is clever because it attempts to account for the ‘wrong’ radiocarbon dating as a result of N-14 atoms , each with 7 protons, 7 neutrons, transmuting to C-14 atoms, each with 6 protons, 8 neutrons, due to a proton being ejected and replaced with a neutron, matching what happens in the upper atmosphere via cosmic ray bombardment to generate new top-up C-14 on a daily basis.
Maybe those guys are the mirror image of this investigator’s shortcomings – too much physics, nuclear physics especially, not enough physiology and biochemistry. There is no known mechanism whereby the fragile molecules of life forms, whether living or recently dead, VIP in human form included, can somehow turn into a nuclear reactor, throwing out highly energetic sub-nuclear particles. Any radiation powerful enough to leave a permanent scorch on linen would surely have singed off every strand of hair at the same time, leaving an image of a seemingly clean-shaven man!
There you have it folks – a proposed solution to a mystery that has baffled much better minds than mine for decades, possibly centuries. But I have a compensating advantage over the mastermind fraternity – SHEER BLOODY PERSISTENCE! To any youngsters reading this, still uncertain as to what career to pursue in life, here’s a word of advice. Dispense immediately with any notion of a ‘glamorous’ career at the cutting edge of science if you lack the prime attribute required – sheer bloody single-minded persistence!
Wednesday July 19
What’s needed now is feedback – positive, negative or somewhere in between.
I’m prepared to wait as long as is necessary for my “toastograph” Model 10 to penetrate the sindonological literature, hopefully the wider world, eliciting one hopes some crucial feedback. In the meantime, I’ll continue fine-tuning the model quietly in my spare time. However, as indicated I shan’t be reporting any more experimental data here or elsewhere unless challenged to support/defend particular aspects of the model. The time for “thinking aloud” is over, given there’s now a final model – well over 5 years in the making – on the table and up for DISCUSSION.
Thursday July 20
Recalling the manner in which those strips of metal foil offered complete protection from browning by incident infrared rays, one has an explanation for Heller and Adler’s “blood before image” interpretation of their testing with proteolytic (blood-digesting) enzymes.
How come? Simple. The flour-imprints were overlaid with something opaque to infrared rays, not necessarily metal, resulting in white areas of the same shape in the form of undeveloped flour. When the final irradiated linen was washed there would have been those handy ‘blank’ areas that could then be infilled with painted-on blood (or “blood”).
So, there was no body image under the blood, and, though H&A didn’t say it themselves, probably no image on top of the blood either!
Obviously there are practical aspects, possibly snags etc that will need to be investigated. Further thought will need to be given to whether the linen was imprint side up or down if/when held horizontally over hot charcoal embers. Up makes it easier if loose overlays are in place, relying solely on gravity to keep them in their chosen locations.
Sigh. A model-building investigator’s work is never done!
Still Thursday: OK, I’ve cracked it – a simple half hour job. I’ll give the details tomorrow while I fine-tune on another couple of experiments. For now, let’s simply say that the solution exploits the new feature of Model 10, namely the development of the flour imprint using radiant heat that is highly directional (i.e. travelling in straight lines).
One is able to create blank areas that can later be infilled with “blood”. Look at the alleged site of the lance wound and one sees white linen as well as red pigment. Sindonology interprets that as the water that accompanied the blood as per Gospel account. That may well have been the aim of our medieval simulators of J of A’s transport shroud (transport, note, NOT burial). But I say the “water” areas are simply regions of blank uncoloured linen in which the flour imprint was protected from infrared radiation, and the undeveloped flour later removed by washing, followed by painting or imprinting with blood, real or look-alike. I’ve compared two protecting agents, and as indicated will describe them briefly tomorrow.
In passing: had some good news today. My daughter has just been offered (and accepted) her first medical consultancy appointment, and it’s in a major UK hospital, in the same city I did my first degree! Indeed, the hospital and the University Biochemistry department are a mere 5 minute walk from each other!
Friday July 21
Here are some images I posted here about a year ago, showing how masking at an early stage of flour imprinting, requiring more of the volunteer’s (or more likely volunteers’) patience and cooperation, could get round the blood-before-image principle.
Well, now I know that the flour imprint can be thermally developed with directional radiated heat, there’s a simple means of improving on the above – one lays the masking linen onto the newly flour-imprinted linen, NOT the subject! After colour development of exposed unshielded flour in the oven (using top element to beam down infrared heat) one peels off the linen masks and hey presto one has a ‘blank canvas’ on which to paint blood (or “blood”).
Where there’s a will there’s a way…
Oh, and I tried using dribbles/trails of vegetable oil, added to the flour imprint instead of those shaped linen pieces, wondering if they would serve as an initial proxy for dribbles/trails of blood. Answer: no. The result was unsatisfactory. I shall spare you the details, as indeed I will be withholding all further experimental details from this site pending such a time as my Model 10 gains some recognition considering it to represent a significant and credible breakthrough in accounting for the Shroud body image AND the radiocarbon dating. OK, so some might consider as bizarre the use of white flour to achieve whole body imprinting. But “bizarre” is the very description that one of the two organizers of the current Pasco pro-authenticity gathering has applied to the Shroud in his conference prospectus.
See this (my italics) under his “Mysteries of the Shroud”:
The above results of STURP’s investigation and the subsequent research indicates that the characteristics of the image are so bizarre that no one (artist or forger) could have created the image either in a previous era or even today. So the first of three mysteries is how could this image have been made?
I consider my Model 10 to be a lot less bizarre than some of the miraculous ‘theophysical’ explanations being touted in Pasco as I speak. Oh, and the above comment is a logical non sequitur. If something appears “bizarre” because there’s no immediate explanation, one cannot then conclude that no artist or forger past or present would be unable to produce it. This modern day “re-forger” aka scientific model-builder has! How long before obsessively pro-authenticity, radiocarbon-denialist sindonology wakes up from its fantasy world of dreams and imaginings to smell the strong black coffee that awaits at a fully-laid breakfast table more than 5 years in the making?
Here’s the design of this morning’s experiment. I pulled some threads from my 1-1 plain weave linen, threaded them through a darning needle, then sewed them back into the fabric as if 3-1 (herring bone weave) – but with a difference. The ends of the new sewn-in thread(s) shown blue were left dangling – some 2 or 3 cm.
I then imprinted flour onto the top surface of the water-soaked linen and irradiated from above with infrared from the oven top element until the flour imprint went dark brown. Anyone care to guess whether coloration migrated across the weave into those dangling threads, and if so how far?
Suffice it to say the result was truly astonishing, and when looked at under my new stereomicroscope goes I believe a long way to explaining the subtlety of the Shroud body image. More tomorrow. In the meantime, think MOBILE CHROMOPHORE!
Saturday July 22, 2017
Another RED LETTER day! More shortly.
Meanwhile, attendees at the True Believer, pro-authenticity Shroudie conference (Pasco, Washington State, USA) will probably be out of their beds now in readiness for the first (Saturday 0745 local time) presentation.
Better those folk don’t know immediately about my latest experimental findings (yesterday and today) with revised Model 10!
It’s never been my desire to be a party pooper where so-called ongoing ‘scientific” conferences are concerned. I prefer to keep a low profile, pursuing the self-disciplined, often self- punishing scientific method (proposing then destroying one’s own hypotheses/brainwaves). One works away day and night systematically until one’s reached some kind of answer – then and only then taking the platform to ENLIGHTEN the genuinely curious and open-minded, not to confuse and bamboozle with selectively-documented preconceptions, read PSEUDOSCIENCE
My latest findings are, I believe the clincher where the Shroud body image is concerned.
Final conclusion: The so-called ‘enigmatic’ Shroud body image was a technologically-novel, indeed precocious medieval feat of image-simulation,. It was brilliantly designed and manufactured to be a reconstruction of the imprint that the newly crucified body of Jesus might have left on Joseph of Arimathea’s fine linen en route between cross and tomb (NOT intended as final burial shroud).
More to follow (today).
Here’s the design of my ‘killer’ experiment, shown just before going into the oven.
It’s a modification to yesterday’s, with partial foil protection for the dangling threads. It’s results show my work is done. No further experimentation is necessary, at least on my part. The explanation for the peculiar image properties of the Shroud body image (half tone effect, striations, discontinuities and more besides) is provided by this simple experiment. The imperative is to persuade sindonologists and anyone else who is interestes to perform the same experiment (but you’ll need a good quality microscope, ideally a compound one with good top illumination (a hand-held LED torch will do).
So what happened? Mobile chromophore migrated from the thermal reaction zone on the upper surface of the linen (site of the flour imprint) down those added threads all the way to the far end, a distance of some 25cm in some cases ! In one instance where the thread was damaged, being disaggregated into a loose collection of fibres, the colour simply migrated through and along widely spaced fibres. On reaching the undamaged thread they simply proceeded on its way as if nothing had happened, proof that chromophore moves inside (not between) fibres.
Late insertion (27 July) : Apols for cancelling this paragraph, the result going back to my stored specimens from this ‘red letter’ experiment and finding the colour suggestive of long distance migration of chromophoren was no longer there (for reasons I have yet to ascertain). This is the first time in over 5 years I’ve had to withdraw the “results” of an experiment! IThere may be some delay in reporting back – please bear with me…
Back to original account:
Be careful not to misinterpret the transverse banding effect (yellow-white-yellow etc) that runs the full length of the dangling thread – sometimes an obvious yellow, but more generally a faint harder- to- see off- white discoloration. It’s not the same kind of image-interruption that one sees when pulling threads from linen that has been imprinted without added threads. In that instance the interruptions in colour are due to protection by warp/weave crossovers. However, in this instance, where there’s no cross-over protection, the interruptions are apparent rather than real. They are due to the manufactured twist in the spun thread that makes surface, i.e. superficial bundles of fibres, spiral around the periphery of the thread, creating a barber’s pole effect. The colour in those superficial bundles – a few fibres at most – IS continuous, as can be seen by rotating the thread. It only seems to be interrupted due to the spiralling effect.
The logical next step would be to write a final post with an arresting title – like “Shroud of Turin – mystery solved”.
But there’s a problem. The world’s ‘favourite search engine’ does not display the title one gives each new posting – it merely displays the site’s title and any tagline that follows. One can only guess as to why individual bloggers are discriminated against in this fashion, having their message blunted or suppressed in this manner (in contrast to MSM press releases whose new titles are shown!).
Am nearing the end of this posting, and indeed the site, my self-imposed task – namely to combat the relentless outpouring of Shroudie pseudoscience – now essentially complete, except to respond to comments.
Sunday 23rd July
The Pasco proceedings ended a few hours ago. I’d had a ‘past 24 hrs’ seacrh under (turin shroud pasco) to see if there had been any ‘leakage’ of proceedings to the local or national press – none , surprisingly I thought. Does that mean no startling new discoveries or revelations? Is the pro-authenticity well finally running dry?
Maybe, maybe not. What my search has revealed in the last few minutes is a crop of video clips from the proceedings, apparent;y live-streamed.
Here’s the list so far. I’ll update if or when new ones appear.
1. Chemistry of the image
2. Problems with cloth collapse
3. Human chromosome acting as radio-antenna
4. Experimental effects of coronal discharge
5. Free electron
6. Do we need evidence…?
7. Ecclesiastical authorities
8. Panel discussion
Still Sunday: second crop ( though I dread to think what this impromptu library of live links to YouTube clips is doing to my site’s download time…)
9 Othon de la Roche
10. A geometric mechanism
11. Dating Techniques
12. Explaining the color of blood…
13. Linen coloration by pulsed radiation
14. Invisible reweave
Monday 24th July
several 11 days no less since I used the Web to unveil what is effectively a new radiation model for the Shroud – one deploying invisible infrared, but still highly matter- interacting and/or heating like most other electromagnetic radiation. By using the site’s tagline (see small print next to the site’s title) I’ve been able to enlist the aid of otherwise unhelpful Google to get the message across, after a fashion, my latest breakthrough appearing on Page 7 or thereabouts of a search under (shroud of turin).
Result to date? Zilch. Absolutely zilch – no references elsewhere that I can see, despite the daily onslaught of so much that is fanciful, non-objective authenticity-fixated, authenticity-promoting research, AND despite the Pasco conference, now ended with its focus on radiation models (though corpse-emitted mind-bending streams of heavy subatomic particles and thus unashamedly authenticity-promoting!).
That’s the trouble – 99% of the interest in the Shroud is from those who not only believe in its authenticity, but appear to crave it if the truth be told. Their ears are closed to explanations that accept the radiocarbon dating, but that doesn’t stop them claiming repeatedly that modern science cannot reproduce the chief characteristics. Indeed some, like Mark Antonacci in one of his presentations at Pasco goes further, claiming the body image cannot and will not be reproduced EVER on account of it being miraculous (How can you be so certain, Mark? Have you read my postings these last two years, here or earlier on Dan Porter’s now retired site).
The internet is a big let down. I understand why Google is the world’s favourite search engine – the competition being vastly inferior – but as stated repeatedly on this site, Google is sadly not content to deliver new ideas – it filters, curates, promotes, buries – things that a search engine should NOT be doing, not unless folk specifically approve of its intervention and selection.
There’s no point my writing a new post, maybe with impact in mind. Google will simply display the same site title, the same tagline and leave off the new posting’s title. The only indication of a new post will be the more recent date, but then Google takes days to pick up on my WordPress postings, such that they miss being listed under ‘Past Hour, Past 24 hours etc. Summin’ needs to be done.
Friday Aug 11, 2017
Well, I will do another posting, but with little if anything by way of new data. It will simply be a response to one of the papers presented at Pasco, July 21, of which so far I’ve only seen the abstract (though itself hypertensive in the extreme, claiming as it did that no other ‘photograph’ responds to a 3D-rendering bit of ancient analogue software as well as the TS).
Here’s the first of 2 images that will be shown at the start of the next posting:
No initial inputted ‘photograph’ could possibly have produced so good a 3D rendering (ImageJ software) unless it had some kind of embedded 3D encoding, right?
Oops (thank you Microsoft Paint):
Yup, no 3D history whatsoever. It’s the software that creates the impression of 3D, not the inputted image!
Oh, and Gatekeeper Google has banished this site completely from its (shroud of turin) listings, at least the first 20 pages. Its place has been taken by much ephemera, despite the Any Time listing, much of a commercial nature (eBay and other unflagged ads and other crypto-commerce and ideology-promotion etc).
Google – you are the PITS!
Ah! The latest page. I must confess I only found this after I had posted my comment to James Bond. More later…
Have been grinding teeth these last few days, a result of seeing this abstract from Pasco, Friday July 21 :
10:15 am to 10:35 am “Use of the VP-8 Image Analyzer with a photograph of the Shroud of Turin exhibiting 3D results” by Janis Winchester.
This research uses a VP-8 Image Analyzer, manufactured by Interpretation Systems Inc., with a photograph of the Shroud of Turin. The image emerging on the oscilloscope of the VP-8 shows the information embedded on the fibers of the image on the Shroud of Turin. The findings detail the pattern of the discolored fibers that show wounds of a spear entrance and exit point and other marks of a man who died by crucifixion. The unique feature is the 3D appearance from the 2D photograph of the Shroud of Turin. No other photograph shows this characteristic. A thank you is extended to Shroud Researcher Mr. Kevin Moran for the use of his VP-8 Image Analyzer, and assisting with a video for this presentation.
OK, it’s a VP-8 being used – old analogue technology – not the digital ImageJ this investigator has used on and off these last 5 years. So it’s just possible (just!) that one gets different results with the VP-8. But I doubt it somehow. That being the case it’s time to confront head on what I regard as major disinformation regarding the “uniqueness” of the Shroud image, relative to other photographs (taking that term in its widest sense to mean photographs of real anatomy or IMPRINTS thereof).
Expect a new posting in the next few days where I will ring the major changes on the two chief variables:
1. photograph of human anatomy in natural or artificial light versus imprints thereof – testing both positive AND tone-reversed negative – and:
2. elevation mode in ImageJ, i.e. whether one promotes the darkest or lightest parts of the image.
No, the Shroud image is NOT unique as regards 3D response in ImageJ, probably VP-8 as well, as will be seen… One just needs to be less starry eyed and a wee bit more scientific – like running a proper/full set of controls!
PS Added Thursday Aug 10
Have just discovered that Janis Winchester has a website, one that combines sprituality, relaxation techniques etc with brief references to the Turin Shroud.
I’ve used the Comment facility to send the following:
As a courtesy, I’m writing this to let you know that I have commented on the abstract of your presentation at Pasco on my latest posting (in the Comments, not the main posting).
As stated, your views on the uniqueness of the Shroud’s 3D ‘properties’ are ones I have seen many times before from any number of Shroud authorities, indeed from STURP’s John Jackson and John Heller no less, but have to say I totally reject, for reasons I’ll be setting out in my next posting. The so-called “3D properties” are a standard feature of any imprint that is entered into software specifically programmed to elevate image density onto a new artificially-created z axis perpendicular to the original 2D x-y plane. Naturally, one has to accept the Shroud body image as an imprint – not a protophotograph . Frankly I consider that a head-to-head image of a man’s body – frontal and dorsal- can be nothing but an imprint , unless proved conclusively otherwise with conventional physics and chemistry. Starting with a one-off, untestable, non-falsifiable miraculous event (resurrectional incandescence with outburst of allegedly image-creating radiation) and then ‘bolting on’ conventional science is not science in my view. I shall be candid: it’s pseudoscience masquerading as science, and you Janis, despite your forensic background are now part of the problem, not the solution.
And this is how I commented on the same presentation to Russ Breault and the Shroud Science Group:
“The idea that the VP-8 was “not a computer but an oscilloscope” is meaningless. Although in the video you reference Kevin Moran appears to be using a fairly conventional oscilloscope to display the results of the image manipulation program, the VP-8 is not the oscilloscope but the box beside it (the computer), which converts pixels of an image into 3D co-ordinates in order for them to be displayed on the oscilloscope screen. It is certainly true that we can now control far more parameters than the VP-8 machine could, but the basic principle is identical. I thank you for Janis Winchester’s 2017 presentation, and apologise to her sincerity, but hardly a sentence of her presentation was scientifically intelligible. Sentences like “In fact it was the brightness embedded in the fabric that recorded this historical photo” are either meaningless or incorrect, depending on how they are to be interpreted. Her identification of an exit wound for the Spear is wholly untenable.”
Good morning Hugh
All this talk of oscilloscopes as part of a VP-8 set up is complete news to me. The ones I saw in the late 50s sitting on the physics teacher’s bench at school were only capable of displaying pulsating electrical signals, and I see nothing on the wiki entry to suggest they are used for modern digitized image display.
Mention the VP-8 and I think of Pete Schumacher, a VP-8 engineer even before STURP in the late 70s. But here’s a still from a video clip of Pete in meet-the-people mode at his Shroud exhibition centre in Alamogordo, NM.
That’s a 3D -rendered image on that display monitor, so Pete I’m pleased to see has moved with the times. Well, partly, In the video we see him altering the angle of view of the greenish Shoud face by twiddling knobs on that separate unit. You and I do the same simply by stroking a touchpad on our laptop pre-loaded with fuly-digitized ImageJ!
So why did Janis opt for a VP-8? What’s it got to offer that ImageJ hasn’t? One thing it doesn’t offer is a frame around the image displaying all one’s settings, a valuable resource to informed visitors to say nothing of those of us who in the past have been accused of producing fake self-serving images (like the time I showed that painted representations in 19th century art of Jesus recumbent on J of A’s linen responded quite well to 3D-rendering!)
As for Janis’s other points, I’m addressing her “unique photograph’ claim in more details today (using, not abusing ImageJ). As for the lance wound site being allegedly visible in the body image I took Giulio Fanti to task some 5 years ago for doing the same:
His brief haughty reply (on Dan Porter’s site) was to tell me to address any objections to the Journal’s editors, which I have to say was to my way of thinking a mechanical engineer displaying a total misunderstanding of the role of the peer-reviewed SCIENCE journal, namely to act as filter, often less than perfect, NOT to serve as concrete wall between authors and readership.