Posted on 03/26/2013 8:14:48 PM PDT by NYer
Professor Giulio Fanti and journalist Saverio Gaeta have published a book with the results of some chemical and mechanical tests which confirm that the Shroud dates back to the 1st century
ANDREA TORNIELLI
ROME
New scientific experiments carried out at the University of Padua have apparently confirmed that the Shroud Turin can be dated back to the 1st century AD. This makes its compatible with the tradition which claims that the cloth with the image of the crucified man imprinted on it is the very one Jesus’ body was wrapped in when he was taken off the cross. The news will be published in a book by Giulio Fanti, professor of mechanical and thermal measurement at the University of Padua’s Engineering Faculty, and journalist Saverio Gaeta, out tomorrow. “Il Mistero della Sindone” (The Mystery of the Shroud) is edited by Rizzoli (240 pp, 18 Euro).
What’s new about this book are Fanti’s recent findings, which are also about to be published in a specialist magazine and assessed by a scientific committee. The research includes three new tests, two chemical ones and one mechanical one. The first two were carried out with an FT-IR system, so using infra-red light, and the other using Raman spectroscopy. The third was a multi-parametric mechanical test based on five different mechanical parameters linked to the voltage of the wire. The machine used to examine the Shroud’s fibres and test traction, allowed researchers to examine tiny fibres alongside about twenty samples of cloth dated between 3000 BC and 2000 AD.
The new tests carried out in the University of Padua labs were carried out by a number of university professors from various Italian universities and agree that the Shroud dates back to the period when Jesus Christ was crucified in Jerusalem. Final results show that the Shroud fibres examined produced the following dates, all of which are 95% certain and centuries away from the medieval dating obtained with Carbon-14 testing in 1988: the dates given to the Shroud after FT-IR testing, is 300 BC ±400, 200 BC ±500 after Raman testing and 400 AD ±400 after multi-parametric mechanical testing. The average of all three dates is 33 BC ±250 years. The book’s authors observed that the uncertainty of this date is less than the single uncertainties and the date is compatible with the historic date of Jesus’ death on the cross, which historians claim occurred in 30 AD.
The tests were carried out using tiny fibres of material extracted from the Shroud by micro-analyst Giovanni Riggi di Numana who passed away in 2008 but had participated in the1988 research project and gave the material to Fanti through the cultural institute Fondazione 3M.
Doing well enough. I’ve been poking around here again for about the past month.
bumpus ad summum
“I understand perfectly the theory that medieval patches could have tainted the sample.”
It’s not a theory. It is a fact.
But it was caused by some kind of radiation, right? That's what I meant by "scorch."
What does "vertically collimated" mean? That the rays of radiation were parallel?
Even the most cursory knowledge of the Shroud and its history clearly debunks these results, yet "the matter is closed" for you. That's pretty awesome work, dude.
Thanks for the correction. But was not the repair done because of a fire? Rather than saying “scorched patch” maybe I should have said “scorch that was patched”?
I did some reading and it is not universally agreed that the sample was contaminated. Why do you object to another C14 test? Are you afraid that it will also show a medieval genesis for the Shroud?
wow..it should be more often!
I don’t have a problem with it. The fact is the first test was done by people who knew about as much about its history as you apparently do, so they went to the best possible place on the Shroud to find it a medieval forgery, though of course there is no technology in existence even today that could make such a forgery, but nevermind that—the matter is settled, right?
We really don't know the mechanism of what caused the formation of the caramel like melanoidin coating. We do know they come about from a Maillard Reaction that can be the result of radiation, light exposure, chemical interactions, and the just passage of time. One very likely modality is chemical out gassing in which chemical by product gasses produced by the early beginnings of decomposition, putrescence and cadaverine, exude from the pores and orifices to then react with the starches of the soapwort. However, gasses don't act the way we see the image has formed on the Shroud which it indicates the modal cause had to act only in a vertical vector with absolutely no angular dispersion. Gasses act generally according to Boyle's law, expanding to fill the space available. . . or if heated, rise chaotically, but don't fall.
Radiation, emanates from a point source, unless constrained by either an aperture or a magnetic field, in a spherical manner, not in a dual vector, 180° opposite to each other, one apparently directly up, the other apparently directly down. . . Especially from every spot on the body. Why did no image forming modality emanate 90° or any other angle away from this vertical collimated mode? We know none did because of the high resolution of the image and the lack of of blurring that would have necessarily been caused by any other impinging radiation from sources NOT primary or necessary to the image. Strange. Had the modality of formation been even slightly non-collimated, the image would be a blurry mess, including data from neighboring body masses in a cacophony of noise overwhelming the necessary actual body-to-shroud distance data that was somehow recorded in melanoidin caramel color density.
No. This area of the Shroud was not damaged in fire and was not burned. This was a corner where, over the years, it was handled, hung, and abused. It got frayed and worn, perhaps torn. It was essentially so worn out after a thousand years of being held up by that corner it had to be darned. No scorch there.
Words become inadequate. Happy Easter indeed.
Well, you say there’s no technology that could reproduce this, but an Italian scientist reproduced it using techniques available in the 14th Century:
https://sites.google.com/site/luigigarlaschelli/shroudreproduction
I would say the tests performed on the Shroud were done by people who knew as much about its history as YOU do. Are you aware that there is apparently no record of the Shroud’s existence prior to the 1300s?
I am a skeptic, so I have an open mind. If someone performs another radiocarbon dating test on the Shroud and comes up with a 1st Century date, then I will stand corrected. Until then, there is an accurate dating method which places the Shroud long after the death of Jesus.
Thanks for the info. I had heard something about the linear, laser-like “radiation.” Very unusual, to say the least.
I’ve met Dr. D’Mahala and saw his presentation on the STURP expedition’s data collection techniques and research findings. Your insinuation that he knows little/nothing about the Shroud is ridiculous. Feel free to go to one of his presentations and try to sharpshoot him. I hope someone gets it on camera.
I didnt say a word about that doctor. You Implied that the people who carbon-dated the Shroud knew nothing about it, and I implied that the same goes for you. Set aside the religious zealotry for a minute and look at the reported facts skeptically.
I know, right? What gets me it the patterned rippling, almost like looking at an image under the surface of a pond.
More than that, it was subjected to a fire... caused by heating an enclosed box wherein it resided. Anyone who has ever made char-cloth for starting fires would recognize the process, which ends with an almost pure carbon result. That amount of carbon in an enclosed space would permeate the cloth and mess with results, I would suppose.
At any rate, the original carbon dating was not accurate and proven so.
Nice try, but it doesn’t match the actual test results. Here’s a summary report on the carbon-dating:
http://www.shroud.com/nature.htm
Note that the testing protocol included various cleaning methods to eliminate possible contaminants. Besides, the number of carbon atoms in a bit of smoke pale compared to the number in the fabric sample itself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.