tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4111782305190930044.post3546887938390996680..comments2023-10-19T04:59:08.088-07:00Comments on science buzz: A step-by-step guide to faking the Turin Shroud (on a miniature scale - but it's the principle that matters)sciencebodhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12051016731274875332noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4111782305190930044.post-43122723178617807332012-03-31T14:46:16.832-07:002012-03-31T14:46:16.832-07:00Hello Anonymous (assuming there is just one of you...Hello Anonymous (assuming there is just one of you who posted the last two comments this evening, for which I thank you).<br /><br />I'm more and more doubtful that the image of the face, especially, came from a fully-rounded subject. I think it was a rather flat bas-relief. That would explain the rather sudden cut-off at the left and right peripheries, roughly at the cheekbones. If it were a bas-relief, and a separate one for the head (which is so much better-imaged than the rest of the body) then it did not even have to be a metal template: one could have been made in clay and baked or fired without going to a lot of trouble, and have been able to resist cracking on reheating sufficiently to leave a scorch.<br /><br />The suggestion that it is a Maillard reaction product is an interesting one, but I doubt whether colour alone could be grounds for thinking so, especially for a faint image (faint scorches produced by heat are yellow rather than brown). There is in any case a simple chemical test that would distinguish a Maillard from a non-Maillard product, namely nitrogen (measured as total nitrogen, say with the Kjeldahl reaction). Maillard reactions require a source of nitrogen, needless to say - but I don't set much store by Rogers' suggestion that putrefaction amines (cadaverine etc) provided the nitrogen, especially if it involves any idea of a 'vapourgraph' which could hardly produce a sharp image - and was hardly likely given the biblical time scale).sciencebodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12051016731274875332noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4111782305190930044.post-48313023817277865792012-03-31T12:36:25.700-07:002012-03-31T12:36:25.700-07:00One more problem with the scorch theory: scorched ...One more problem with the scorch theory: scorched fibers look quite different from the shroud image fibers at a microscopic level. The shroud fibers resemble the result of a Maillard reaction.<br /> Thanks for your thought-provoking blog.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4111782305190930044.post-64616211012685493452012-03-31T12:33:55.922-07:002012-03-31T12:33:55.922-07:00The scorch theory like yours has been discussed ye...The scorch theory like yours has been discussed years ago in shroud studies. The big problem is the spatial distortion cause by translating a curved body onto a flat sheet. The shroud shows an undistorted and foreshortened image: the original object would have to be exactly pre-distorted to exactly account for this translation!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4111782305190930044.post-4416373041903890762012-02-29T10:21:53.555-08:002012-02-29T10:21:53.555-08:0029th Feb 2012
Discovered today a possible signatu...29th Feb 2012<br /><br />Discovered today a possible signature for a scorch that has been produced with an underlying sand bed. The combination of hot meal and force that is needed to push the template into the sand has the effect of forcing the fibres apart. So when one holds the linen up to the light one sees multiple points of light in the image area. Pressing the cold template into the linen and sand does not cause this distortion of this fibres. <br /><br />Does anyone know if the image areas of the Turin Shroud show similar "twinkles" when held up to the light, indicative of force and heat having been applied? The absence of such a signature would be evidence against a sand bed model having been used, needless to say, and indeed might be evidence against there having been<br /> any forceful stretching of linen over a hot template.<br /><br />Maybe I am making a rod for my own back here, but as a scientist I am interested in discovering the truth - not in pushing a pet theory if it does not fit the evidence or predictions.sciencebodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12051016731274875332noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4111782305190930044.post-12383103017958784382012-02-02T23:56:47.446-08:002012-02-02T23:56:47.446-08:00Why is the sand essential? That's easily expla...Why is the sand essential? That's easily explained. Without it, one gets a tenting effect between raised features which prevents the fabric making contact with lower areas of relief. By pressing into sand, the fabric is made to conform with all parts of the 3D artefact - not just the "pointy" bits. The result is a more accurate rendering of the entire contours of the object.sciencebodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12051016731274875332noreply@blogger.com