RESEARCH
· The papers are listed in the sequence they were originally written with the most recent paper at the top. The listed date is for the most recent revision.
· The papers are arranged by topics.
· The abstracts of the papers are given.
If you are new to this page, we recommend you start with paper 33 on carbon dating and paper 34 on image formation.
Sequence of Papers
Paper 40 "
What Happened to Jesus' Body in His Resurrection?" by Robert A. Rucker, August 31, 2024
Paper 39 "Evaluation of Hypotheses for Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin" by Robert A. Rucker, July 8, 2024
Paper 38 "Comments on Videos by 'Reason to Doubt'" by Robert A. Rucker, February 15, 2024
Criteria for Evaluating Image Formation Hypotheses for the Shroud of Turin" by Robert A. Rucker, January 18, 2024, revision 2 August 17, 2024 Non-Destructive Age Measurements of Material from the Shroud of Turin" by Michael Kowalski, November 4, 2023, reviewed by Robert A. Rucker Nuclear Analysis of the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, July 24, 2023, revised October 28, 2023Hypothesis for Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, July 24, 2023, revised October 17, 2024, reviewed by Michael KowalskiSolving the Carbon Dating Problem for the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, July 12, 2022, revised October 28, 2023Overview of the Shroud of Turin to Promote Testing" by Robert A. Rucker, November 21, 2021 My Path into Dating of the Shroud" by Robert A. Rucker, August 21, 2021 Does Carbon Dating Disprove the Shroud’s Authenticity?" by Robert A. Rucker, July 20, 2020, revised October 28, 2023Date of the Shroud of Turin" by Robert A. Rucker, July 16, 2020The Carbon Dating of the Shroud is Explained by Neutron Absorption" by Robert A. Rucker, August 21, 2020How the Image Was Formed on the Shroud" by Robert A. Rucker, July 31, 2020Why We Can See the Image on the Shroud" by Robert A. Rucker, December 26, 2019Paper 25 "
Understanding the 1988 Carbon Dating of the Shroud" by Robert A. Rucker, August 21, 2020Paper 24 "
Holistic Solution to the Mysteries of the Shroud" by Robert A. Rucker, July 16, 2020Carbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin to 1260-1390 AD is Not Explained by Normal Contamination" by Robert A. Rucker, July 10, 2019Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, April 18, 2019Paper 21 “Understanding the Statistical Analysis of the Carbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, February 14, 2020
Testing the Neutron Absorption Hypothesis” by Robert A. Rucker, April 18, 2019Status of Research on the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, July 16, 2020Paper 18 “One Page Summaries” by Robert A. Rucker, November 14, 2018
Paper 17 “Evaluation of ‘A BPA Approach to the Shroud of Turin’” by Robert A. Rucker, September 27, 2018
Paper 16 “Explaining the Mysteries of the Shroud” by Robert A. Rucker, July 7, 2018
Paper 15 “Summary of Scientific Research on the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, July 7, 2018
Paper 14 “Potential Problems with a Cloth Collapse Hypothesis for Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, July 7, 2018
Paper 13 “The Carbon Dating Problem for the Shroud of Turin, Part 3: The Neutron Absorption Hypothesis” by Robert A. Rucker, July 7, 2018
Paper 12 “The Carbon Dating Problem for the Shroud of Turin, Part 2: Statistical Analysis” by Robert A. Rucker, July 7, 2018
Paper 11 “The Carbon Dating Problem for the Shroud of Turin, Part 1: Background” by Robert A. Rucker, July 7, 2018
Paper 10 “Proposal for C14 Dating of Charred Material Removed from the Shroud” by Robert A. Rucker, April 29, 2018
Paper 9 “Ideas for Research on the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, November 10, 2016
Paper 8 “MCNP Analysis of Neutrons Released from Jesus’ Body in the Resurrection” by Robert A. Rucker, October 12, 2016
Paper 7 “Mr. Dotman in Lineland” by Robert A. Rucker, October 6, 2016
Paper 6 “Role of Radiation in Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, July 16, 2020
Paper 5 “Information Content on the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, October 11, 2016
Paper 4 “Review of ‘Test the Shroud’ by Mark Antonacci” by Robert A. Rucker, October 11, 2016
Paper 3 “Review of ‘The Shroud of Turin: Radiation Effects, Aging, and Image Formation’ by Ray Rogers” by Robert A. Rucker, Giulio Fanti, Mark Antonacci, Tony Fleming, and Keith Propp, October 11, 2016
Paper 2 “The Disappearance of Jesus’ Body, Part 2: Physical Considerations” by Robert A. Rucker, October 11, 2016
Paper 1 “The Disappearance of Jesus’ Body, Part 1: Biblical and Theological Considerations” by Robert A. Rucker, October 8, 2016
Papers by Topics
A. Summary Papers
Paper 35 Nuclear Analysis of the Shroud of Turin
Paper 32 Overview of the Shroud of Turin to Promote Testing
Paper 24 Holistic Solution to the Mysteries of the Shroud
Paper 19 Status of Research on the Shroud of Turin
Paper 18 One Page Summaries
Paper 16 Explaining the Mysteries of the Shroud
Paper 15 Summary of Scientific Research on the Shroud of Turin
B. The Carbon Dating Problem
Paper 33 Solving the Carbon Dating Problem for the Shroud of Turin
Paper 31 My Path into Dating of the Shroud
Carbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin to 1260-1390 AD is Not Explained by Normal ContaminationPaper 20 Testing the Neutron Absorption Hypothesis
Paper 13 The Carbon Dating Problem for the Shroud of Turin, Part 3: The Neutron Absorption Hypothesis
Paper 12 The Carbon Dating Problem for the Shroud of Turin, Part 2: Statistical Analysis
Paper 11 The Carbon Dating Problem for the Shroud of Turin, Part 1: Background
Paper 10 Proposal for C14 Dating of Charred Material Removed from the Shroud
Paper 8 MCNP Analysis of Neutrons Released from Jesus’ Body in the Resurrection
C. Other Dating Methods
Paper 36 Non-Destructive Age Measurements of Material from the Shroud of Turin
Paper 29 Date of the Shroud of Turin
D. Image Formation on the Shroud
Paper 39 Evaluation of Hypotheses for Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin
Paper 37 Criteria for Evaluating Image Formation Hypotheses for the Shroud of Turin
Paper 34 Hypothesis for Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin
Paper 22 Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin
Paper 14 Potential Problems with a Cloth Collapse Hypothesis for Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin
Paper 6 Role of Radiation in Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin
Paper 5 Information Content on the Shroud of Turin
E. Other Aspects of Shroud Science
Paper 29 Date of the Shroud of Turin
Paper 9 Ideas for Research on the Shroud of Turin
F. Evaluation of Items by Others
Paper 38 Comments on Videos by 'Reason to Doubt'
Paper 17 Evaluation of ‘A BPA Approach to the Shroud of Turin’
Paper 4 Review of ‘Test the Shroud’ by Mark Antonacci
Paper 3 Review of ‘The Shroud of Turin: Radiation Effects, Aging, and Image Formation’ by Ray Rogers
G. Miscellaneous
Paper 7 Mr. Dotman in Lineland
Paper 2 The Disappearance of Jesus’ Body, Part 2: Physical Considerations
Paper 1 The Disappearance of Jesus’ Body, Part 1: Biblical and Theological Considerations
Abstracts of Papers
Paper 40 "What Happened to Jesus' Body in His Resurrection?" by Robert A. Rucker, August 31, 2024
According to the Gospels in the New Testament, Jesus’ burial tomb was found to be empty by his followers on Sunday morning after his crucifixion. This was claimed to be due to Jesus’ resurrection from the dead, thus proving that he was the Son of God, i.e. God in the flesh. One question that arises with this claim is the issue of what happened to Jesus’ body in his resurrection. In this paper, three sources of information are considered to answer this question: 1) the account in the Gospels of Jesus’ resurrection, 2) the theology of resurrection throughout the Bible, and 3) the Shroud of Turin. The Shroud is included because the 1988 carbon dating of the Shroud to 1260-1390 AD is best explained by a burst of radiation from the body that included neutrons that produced new C-14 on the cloth that shifted the carbon date forward from the true date. This radiation burst probably also included charged particles such as protons that formed the full size front and dorsal images on the Shroud of a man who was crucified exactly as Jesus was crucified. In all of human history, no other dead body has released such a burst of radiation that formed an image of itself on cloth. But Jesus’ body, in his resurrection, could have gone through a nuclear process in which this extremely short burst of radiation was emitted. Thus, the Shroud of Turin provides scientific evidence for Jesus’ resurrection.
Paper 39 "Evaluation of Hypotheses for Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin" by Robert A. Rucker, July 8, 2024
Multiple hypotheses have been proposed to explain how the front and dorsal images of a crucified man were formed on the Shroud of Turin. This paper evaluates various hypotheses for image formation. The primary criterion is that for a hypothesis to be true, it must be consistent with all the scientific evidence related to the images. The hypotheses evaluated include a generic gas diffusion hypothesis, the Maillard reaction hypothesis, a generic direct contact hypothesis, the electric charge separation hypothesis, a generic scorch hypothesis, and the roasted flour and oil hypothesis. There are many other hypotheses for image formation that have not yet been evaluated by the procedure used in this paper.
Comments on Videos by 'Reason to Doubt'" by Robert A. Rucker, February 15, 2024The stated goal of Jordan and Jerod on Reasons to Doubt on YouTube.com is to debunk the Shroud of Turin. They admit they start with the assumption that it cannot be the authentic burial cloth of Jesus and that it cannot be evidence of his resurrection. This is because of their philosophical presupposition of naturalism, which means that only explanations that are consistent with our current understanding of physics are allowed. Explanations that involve anything outside or beyond our current understanding of physics, what they would consider to be “miraculous” or “supernatural”, cannot be allowed. Thus, their conclusion that the Shroud is not Jesus’ burial cloth and cannot be evidence of Jesus’ resurrection must follow from their presuppositions. This paper consists of the comments that Bob Rucker submitted to Reasons to Doubt regarding some of their videos.
Paper 37 "Criteria for Evaluating Image Formation Hypotheses for the Shroud of Turin" by Robert A. Rucker, January 18, 2024, revision 2 August 17, 2024
Paper 36 "Non-Destructive Age Measurements of Material from the Shroud of Turin" by Michael Kowalski, November 4, 2023, reviewed by Robert A. Rucker
In 1988, samples taken from a single corner of the Shroud were carbon dated to 1260-1390 AD with a 95% confidence. This conclusion did however contradict a substantial body of relative dating evidence which indicated that the Shroud was much older than this result would suggest, which led to widespread concern that the radiocarbon test had failed to accurately determine its true age. Although many scientists would wish to repeat that test, the Church authorities have so far refused to allow any further samples of material to be removed from the Shroud. Scientists studying the Shroud have therefore been limited to using just a few minute fragments of Shroud material that were removed during examinations during the 1970s and in 1988.
This restriction has undoubtedly hampered Shroud research but it hasn’t completely stopped its progress. Indeed, during the last ten years, scientists have found new, non-destructive ways of measuring the age of linen fabric, which are based upon the fact that the structure of cellulose molecular chains changes slowly over time. They have shown that there is a clear correlation between the age of linen and measurements made using various spectroscopic and mechanical techniques. The results obtained from using these techniques to determine the age of some of the material previously removed from the Shroud are consistent with it having a first century origin.
Paper 35 “Nuclear Analysis of the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, July 24, 2023, revised October 28, 2023
The Shroud of Turin contains full-size front and dorsal images of a man who was crucified exactly as Jesus was crucified according to the New Testament. The main mysteries of the Shroud are how the images were formed, why the Shroud carbon dated to 1260-1390 AD, and why the blood which would have dried on the body is now on the cloth, since dry blood is not absorbed into fabric. By following the scientific evidence where it leads, the Vertically Collimated Radiation Burst (VCRB) hypothesis was developed to explain these mysteries. According to this hypothesis, an extremely brief radiation burst from the body included charged particles, probably protons, which deposited their charge onto the cloth producing electrical currents in the fibers. This caused localized heating of the fibers which discolored them, producing the images of a crucified man. Deuterium nuclei requires the least energy to fission, which would release protons to form the images and neutrons that could explain the 1988 carbon dating of the Shroud including: 1) an average date of 1260-1390, 2) a change in the carbon date as a function of the distance from the short edge of the cloth of about 36 years per cm, 3) the range and distribution of the 12 subsample dates, and 4) the carbon dating of the Sudarium of Oviedo, believed to be Jesus’ face cloth, to about 700 AD. Nuclear analysis computer calculations indicate these four results can be explained by neutrons emitted from the body. A small fraction of the neutrons would have been absorbed in the trace amount of N-14 in the fibers which produced new C-14 atoms in the fibers by the [N14+neutronC14+proton] reaction. This shifted the measured carbon date forward from the true date. If the radiation burst were sufficiently brief and intense, it could possibly have forced the blood off the body onto the cloth. This opens the possibility that the Shroud of Turin could be the authentic burial cloth of Jesus Christ. Every effort should be made to conduct further testing of this unique cloth.
Paper 34 “Hypothesis for Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, July 24, 2023, revised October 17, 2024, reviewed by Michael Kowalski
The Shroud of Turin contains full-size front and dorsal images of a man who was crucified exactly as Jesus was crucified according to the New Testament. One of the main mysteries of the Shroud is how these images were formed. Scientific examination of the Shroud in 1978 determined these images were not formed by pigment, scorch, liquid, photography, or contact between the body and the cloth. These front and dorsal images have a resolution of a few mm and are formed by a mottled pattern of discoloration on the top two or three layers of fibers in the threads. The discoloration thickness is about 0.2 micrometers around the outer circumference of the fibers, which have a diameter of about 15 micrometers. 3D or topographical information is encoded into the images that relates to the vertical distance of the cloth from the body, without side images of the body. These are some of the 27 characteristics of the images that were considered to develop a hypothesis for image formation. Each of these 27 evidences was considered one at a time to logically build a hypothesis that is consistent with this evidence. This hypothesis explains how the images were formed by an extremely brief intense burst of vertically collimated low energy charged particles, probably protons, emitted in the body that was wrapped in the Shroud. According to this hypothesis, when the protons deposited their charge onto the cloth, it produced corona discharges between the body and the cloth that produced electrical currents in the fibers which caused localized heating of the fibers which discolored them to form the images of the crucified man. It is proposed these protons were emitted in the body by the splitting of deuterium nuclei. This process would have also emitted the same number of neutrons as protons. Absorption of a small fraction of these neutrons would have produced new C-14 on the cloth which can explain why the Shroud was carbon dated to 1260-1390 AD rather than the first century.
Paper 33 “Solving the Carbon Dating Problem for the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, July 12, 2022, revised October 28, 2023
There are multiple evidences that the Shroud of Turin is the authentic burial cloth of Jesus Christ. However, in 1988 samples from the corner of the Shroud were carbon dated to 1260- 1390 AD with a claimed 95% confidence. The “carbon dating problem” is how the Shroud of Turin could be the authentic burial cloth of Jesus yet the corner of the Shroud carbon date to 1260-1390 AD. This problem can be solved by understanding the assumptions in carbon dating and understanding how measurement errors can affect experimental results. There are four things that are true of carbon dating relative to Shroud: 1) the average date for the corner of the Shroud (1260-1390), 2) the change in the carbon date as a function of the distance from the short side of the Shroud (about 36 years per cm), 3) the distribution of the 12 subsample dates, and 4) the carbon date (about 700 AD) obtained for the Sudarium of Oviedo, which is believed to be Jesus’ face cloth (John 20:7) and thus related to the Shroud. The correct explanation for the carbon dating of the Shroud is required to be consistent with these four things. The neutron absorption hypothesis proposes that neutrons emitted from the body were absorbed in nitrogen in the cloth to form new C-14 in the fibers, thus shifting the carbon date forward. This is the only hypothesis that is consistent with the above requirement 1, 2, and 4, and is the most likely hypothesis to adequately explain requirement 3. The assumption that the Shroud dates to 1260- 1390 only satisfies the first of these four requirements.
Paper 32 "Overview of the Shroud of Turin to Promote Testing" by Robert A. Rucker, November 21, 2021
Ancient tradition has long claimed the Shroud of Turin to be the authentic burial cloth of Jesus Christ. This is supported by full-size images on the Shroud of the front and back of a man who was crucified exactly as the New Testament says Jesus was crucified. Extensive testing of this linen cloth by the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP, 1978) indicates these images are not due to pigment, scorch, liquid, or photography. This paper is an overview of the Shroud including its images, history, materials, and previous testing. It also includes the author’s hypothesis to explain the main mysteries of the Shroud including image formation, carbon dating of the Shroud in 1988, and features of the blood on the Shroud. The purpose of this paper is to encourage the development of a program for future testing of the Shroud. There are rumors the Shroud may go on exhibition in Turin, Italy, in 2025. To help obtain authorization for further scientific testing possibly following the exhibition in 2025, a comprehensive testing program should be developed for the Shroud to take advantage of advances in technology since the last extensive testing in 1978.
Paper 31 "My Path into Dating of the Shroud" by Robert A. Rucker, August 21, 2021
Bob Rucker describes how early events in his life led him to become interested in the Shroud and to go into nuclear engineering, and how those decisions prepared him to perform nuclear analysis computer calculations to solve the carbon dating problem for the Shroud of Turin.
Does Carbon Dating Disprove the Shroud’s Authenticity?" by Robert A. Rucker, July 20, 2020, revised October 28, 2023Date of the Shroud of Turin" by Robert A. Rucker, July 16, 2020The Carbon Dating of the Shroud is Explained by Neutron Absorption" by Robert A. Rucker, August 21, 2020Abstract: The carbon dating of the Shroud in 1988 concluded that it dates from 1260 to 1390 AD. This paper explains why this conclusion should be rejected. Two types of errors, random errors and systematic errors, can alter the results of every measurement by altering either the measurement process or the samples. Analysis of the values obtained in the 1988 carbon dating indicates a number of problems: 1) two of the three laboratories obtained statistically different dates, 2) the carbon date is different for different locations on the cloth increasing about 36 years per cm (91 years per inch) as the sample location moves further from the bottom of the cloth, and 3) the probability of obtaining a variation of the dates for the 1988 Shroud samples at least as large as was obtained is only 1.4%, which is below the usual acceptance criteria of 5.0%. To explain the variation of the measured dates most likely requires an unexpected factor to have altered the samples, thus causing a systematic error in all the measurements. According to the neutron absorption hypothesis, this unexpected factor is neutron absorption which would have created new C14 on the cloth by the [N14 + neutron → C 14 + proton] reaction. These neutrons were evidently included in the burst of radiation from the body that formed the image of the crucified man on the Shroud, so the two effects, image formation and the shift in the carbon date, are related. To change the carbon date from the time of Jesus' death, about 30 AD, to 1260 AD requires neutron absorption to increase the amount of C14 on the samples by only 16%. This paper is an abridgment of a 38-page paper titled “Understanding the 1988 Carbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin”, available at http://www.shroudresearch.net/research.html
Paper 27 "How the Image Was Formed on the Shroud" by Robert A. Rucker, July 31, 2020
Abstract: To explain the characteristics of the image on the Shroud of Turin, along with the 1988 carbon dating and the characteristics of the blood on the Shroud, it is hypothesized that an extremely brief intense burst of vertically collimated radiation was emitted within the body of the crucified man that was wrapped within the Shroud. This radiation, probably consisting primarily of charged particles, caused a static discharge from the top fibers facing the body, which caused heating in a very thin surface layer on the fibers, which caused molecular damage to the cellulose in this thin layer. With the passage of time and possibly ultraviolet exposure, this thin damaged cellulose layer on the fibers gradually became discolored to form the image of a man that was crucified exactly as Jesus was crucified. By this process, the radiation controlled the location of the discoloration, thus encoding into the image the information that defines the appearance of a crucified man, so that the image could have this appearance. The evidence for this hypothesis is its ability to explain the characteristics of the image, carbon date, and blood on the Shroud.
Why We Can See the Image on the Shroud" by Robert A. Rucker, December 26, 2019Abstract: Every image that a person can see is based on information. For example, a person can be recognized in a photograph because the information that defines the person’s appearance has been encoded into the colors, shades, and positions of the pixels that form the image on the photograph. The same is true for the Shroud. We can see the image on the Shroud because the information that defines the appearance of a crucified man has been encoded into the location of the discoloration on the fibers that make the image on the Shroud. When light carries this information to our eyes, our brains recognize this information as an image of a crucified man.
Paper 25 "Understanding the 1988 Carbon Dating of the Shroud" by Robert A. Rucker, August 21, 2020
Abstract: The carbon dating of the Shroud in 1988 concluded that it dates from 1260 to 1390 AD. This paper explains why this conclusion should be rejected. Two types of errors, random errors and systematic errors, can alter the results of every measurement by altering either the measurement process or the samples. Analysis of the values obtained in the 1988 carbon dating indicates a number of problems: 1) two of the three laboratories obtained statistically different dates, 2) the carbon date is different for different locations on the cloth increasing about 36 years per cm (91 years per inch) as the sample location moves further from the bottom of the cloth, and 3) the probability of obtaining a variation of the dates for the 1988 Shroud samples at least as large as was obtained is only 1.4%, which is below the usual acceptance criteria of 5.0%. To explain the variation of the measured dates most likely requires an unexpected factor to have altered the samples, thus causing a systematic error in all the measurements. According to the neutron absorption hypothesis, this unexpected factor is neutron absorption which would have created new C14 on the cloth by the [N 14 + neutron → C 14 + proton] reaction. These neutrons were evidently included in the burst of radiation from the body that formed the image of the crucified man on the Shroud, so the two effects, image formation and the shift in the carbon date, are related. To change the carbon date from the time of Jesus’ death, about 30 AD, to 1260 AD requires neutron absorption to increase the amount of C14 on the samples by only 16%.
Paper 24 "Holistic Solution to the Mysteries of the Shroud" by Robert A. Rucker, July 16, 2020
Abstract: The Shroud of Turin has been researched more than any other ancient artifact to solve its mysteries, which include the image on the cloth, the carbon date, and the blood. It would be attractive if, by following the evidence where it leads, a single concept, referred to in the title as a “holistic solution,” could be developed to explain these mysteries. This paper presents such an explanation. Based on the scientific evidence, it is hypothesized that an extremely rapid intense burst of radiation was emitted from within the body wrapped in the Shroud. Charged particles and/or electromagnetic radiation such as infrared, visible light, and ultraviolet in this burst of radiation can explain why we can see the image and how the image was formed. Neutrons in this burst of radiation can explain why carbon dating produced a date of 1260-1390 AD instead of the time of Jesus (30 to 33 AD). Neutrons might also explain why the blood has a reddish color. The extremely rapid outward pressure produced by this burst of radiation can explain how the blood was transferred onto the cloth and why the fibers under the blood are not discolored. Methods to test this hypothesis include measurement of the distribution of carbon dates across the Shroud and detection of long half-life isotopes (Cl-36, Ca-41) on the threads and blood on the Shroud and in the proposed limestone tombs.
Carbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin to 1260-1390 AD is Not Explained by Normal Contamination" by Robert A. Rucker, July 10, 2019Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, April 18, 2019Understanding the Statistical Analysis of the Carbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, February 14, 2020Testing the Neutron Absorption Hypothesis” by Robert A. Rucker, April 18, 2019Status of Research on the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, July 16, 2020Paper 18 “One Page Summaries” by Robert A. Rucker, November 14, 2018
This paper consists of six one-page summaries of what is on the Shroud, history of the Shroud, image formation on the Shroud, carbon dating of the Shroud, is the image Jesus, and a list of books and papers we have written on the Shroud.
Paper 17 “Evaluation of ‘A BPA Approach to the Shroud of Turin’” by Robert A. Rucker, September 27, 2018
Abstract: This is an evaluation of a paper published July 10, 2018, in the Journal of Forensic Sciences. The paper is titled “A BPA Approach to the Shroud of Turin” by Matteo Borrini, Ph.D., and Luigi Garlaschelli, M. Sc. A “BPA” is a bloodstain pattern analysis. This paper on BPA of the Shroud is evaluated to determine the soundness of its methods and conclusions. Several elements are included in this evaluation. The general problems with this type of analysis and the specific problems with the experimental procedures in Ref. 1 are considered first. The main conclusions are then considered, including possible explanations of the alleged inconsistencies. This is followed by a description and evaluation of the six experiments involved in the BPA. The paper identifies two alleged inconsistencies between the results of the experiments and the blood on the Shroud: 1) the blood on the back of the left hand compared to the forearm, and 2) the blood on the lower back compared to the location of the side wound. The authors concluded that the alleged contradictions point “against the authenticity of the Shroud itself, suggesting the Turin linen was an artistic or ‘didactic’ representation from the XIV century.” There is nothing in their BPA analysis to indicate the century that the Shroud originated, so the authors evidently based this 14th-century date on their view of previous research on “the historical records, the radiocarbon dating, and the chemical analysis” of the Shroud. As a result, this evaluation next considers the impact of presuppositions on the results of research, and a summary of previous research on the Shroud of Turin. This research has led most Shroud researchers to reject the view that the Shroud originated in the 13th or 14th centuries, contrary to the conclusion in Ref. 1. The conclusion also does not necessarily follow from the experimental results because the alleged inconsistencies are more likely to indicate our lack of understanding of the process before, during, and after crucifixion or result from inadequacies in the experimental procedures. The conclusion of this evaluation is that the experimental results do not constitute valid evidence that the Shroud originated in the 14th century or constitute valid evidence that the Shroud of Turin is not the authentic burial cloth of Jesus.
Paper 16 “Explaining the Mysteries of the Shroud” by Robert A. Rucker, July 7, 2018
Abstract: To determine whether the Shroud of Turin could be the authentic burial cloth of Jesus, the many mysteries related to the Shroud need to be explained with a logically consistent unbiased evidence-based approach that follows the evidence where it leads. This is attempted in this paper based on information, radiation, and neutron absorption. Why we can see the image on the Shroud is explained by the presence of information in the pattern of discolored fibers in the image. Formation of the image is explained by radiation emitted from within the body that communicated the required information to the Shroud to form the image. The carbon dating of the Shroud to 1260 to 1390 AD is explained by neutrons that were apparently included in this radiation. A small fraction of these neutrons would have been absorbed in N14 in the Shroud to form new atoms of C14 in the Shroud. This would have shifted the carbon date forward by up to thousands of years, depending on the location. The man, who was crucified and whose body emitted radiation, is best understood to be Jesus.
Paper 15 “Summary of Scientific Research on the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, July 7, 2018
Abstract: According to ancient tradition, the Shroud of Turin is the authentic burial cloth of Jesus. To determine whether this could be true, more historical and scientific research has been done on the Shroud of Turin than on any other ancient artifact. The purpose of this paper is to summarize the results of the scientific research on the Shroud of Turin. This summary is based on the opinions of most Shroud researchers and on research by the author. Research on the Shroud is summarized using nine summary statements. A multi-step argument is given that the image on the Shroud is that of Jesus of Nazareth. Two objections to these conclusions are considered – that they violate the laws of science and that the authenticity of the Shroud is disproven by the 1988 C14 dating of the Shroud, which concluded that the Shroud dates to 1260 to 1390 AD with a 95% probability. Four reasons are discussed which indicate that this conclusion is not justified by the evidence. This includes consideration of 15 indicators of the Shroud’s date and 6 indications that the 1988 statistical analysis of the C14 dating results was inadequate. The neutron absorption hypothesis is used to explain the apparent C14 date to 1260 to 1390 AD.
Paper 14 “Potential Problems with a Cloth Collapse Hypothesis for Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, July 7, 2018
Abstract: Images of the front and back of a naked crucified man can be seen on the Shroud of Turin. Evidence indicates these images were caused by radiation. The cloth collapse hypothesis holds that the disappearance of the body from within the Shroud of Turin created the conditions for the cloth to rapidly collapse into the region previously occupied by the body, where it encountered radiation that discolored the fibers thus forming the high-resolution front and back images on the Shroud. Potential problems with this hypothesis include: 1) difficulty in forming the front and back images without side images by collapse of the Shroud under the forces of gravity and air pressure difference, 2) the speed of radiation is so much faster than the speed of the cloth that cloth movement becomes irrelevant, and 3) the cloth would not start to collapse until about 99.9% of the radiation had already gone through the cloth, again making cloth movement irrelevant to the image formation. The last two problems can be avoided by assuming that the body becomes mechanically transparent when it starts to disappear. The vertical radiation hypothesis is preferred over the cloth collapse hypothesis due to the latter’s difficulty in explaining why there are no side images. An equation is derived for the distance that the cloth collapses as a function of time after the disappearance of the body.
Paper 13 “The Carbon Dating Problem for the Shroud of Turin, Part 3: The Neutron Absorption Hypothesis” by Robert A. Rucker, July 7, 2018
Abstract: In 1988, the C14 dating methodology was used (Damon, et al.) to date samples from the Shroud of Turin to 1260 to 1390 AD. But research during the last 30 years has convinced leading Shroud researchers that the Shroud is much older than 1260 to 1390 AD, thus contradicting the results of the C14 dating. To solve this carbon dating problem for the Shroud, a three-part series has been written that covers: 1) background, 2) statistical analysis, and 3) the neutron absorption hypothesis, which is this paper. A more thorough statistical analysis than that originally done in Damon indicates that something (technically called a systematic bias) probably affected the measurement values, in addition to the normal random measurement errors. This systematic bias was neither identified nor quantified in Damon so that the resulting date of the measurements (1260 – 1390 AD) should not be regarded as necessarily accurate. There is much evidence to indicate that the image on the Shroud was caused by a burst of radiation from the body that was wrapped in it. It is hypothesized in this paper that if neutrons were included in this burst of radiation, a small fraction of them would be absorbed in the trace amounts of N14 in the linen thus forming new C14 atoms primarily by the (N14 + neutron à C14 + proton) reaction. This newly created C14 would be indistinguishable from the original C14 that was taken into the plant while it was alive, thus shifting the apparent C14 date in the positive direction by up to thousands of years. Computer calculations were performed using the MCNP nuclear analysis computer code to determine that if 2 x 1018 neutrons were emitted from the body it would have increased the C14 concentration at the sample location by 16%, which would have shifted the C14 date from 30 AD to 1260 AD. This number of neutrons is only one in every ten billion that would have been in the body that was wrapped in the Shroud. The MCNP nuclear analysis computer calculations were used to determine C14 dates for samples taken from anywhere on the Shroud. It was found that most locations would date to the future, assuming the usual equations are used to determine the date from the C14 concentration. Specifically, for material removed in 2002 from under the patches at the elbows, samples should date to about 3500 to 4500 AD. This neutron absorption hypothesis is the only hypothesis that is consistent with the four things that are known about C14 dating as it relates to the Shroud of Turin:
· Uncorrected date of 1260 AD at the 1988 sample location,
· Slope of the dates from the three laboratories of about 36 years per cm,
· The range of the dates for the 16 subsamples (1155 to 1410 AD), and
· C14 date of 700 AD for the Sudarium of Oviedo, which according to tradition is the face cloth of Jesus (John 20:7), and thus related to the Shroud.
Paper 12 “The Carbon Dating Problem for the Shroud of Turin, Part 2: Statistical Analysis” by Robert A. Rucker, July 7, 2018
Abstract: In 1988, the C14 dating methodology was used (Damon, et al.) to date samples from the Shroud of Turin to 1260 to 1390 AD. But research during the last 30 years has convinced leading Shroud researchers that the Shroud of Turin is much older than 1260 to 1390 AD, thus contradicting the results of the C14 dating. To solve this carbon dating problem for the Shroud of Turin, a three-part series has been written that covers: 1) background, 2) statistical analysis, and 3) the neutron absorption hypothesis. Part 1 on background information should be read and understood before this paper is attempted. This paper is part 2 in the series and discusses the statistical analysis of the 1988 C14 date measurements. To the extent possible, this paper is written for the layman, and uses only the Chi-squared statistical analysis technique that was used in Damon. Part 3 in this series hypothesizes that neutron absorption in the Shroud explains the results found in the statistical analysis in this paper, as well as the C14 date to 1260 to 1390 AD. In this paper, several indications are discussed that the range of the 1988 C14 date measurements is much too large in comparison to the measurement uncertainties. This indicates that there is a serious problem with the data. Most significantly, a Chi-squared statistical analysis of the measurement data indicates that the variation in the C14 date measurements has only a 1.4% probability of being consistent with the measurement uncertainties. This indicates a 98% probability that something other than random measurement error was also affecting the measured values, such as, in statistical analysis terminology, a systematic bias. Plotting the three laboratory average values indicates that this systematic bias is a function of the distance of the sample from the bottom of the Shroud. This means that each measured value Mi was the result of the actual age (A) of the Shroud plus the bias B(xi, yi), where the xi and yi are the prior position coordinates of each sample (i) on the Shroud, combined with the one sigma random measurement error Ri. The equation for this is Mi = A + B(xi, yi) ± Ri. This systematic bias could have been sufficient to shift the date for the Shroud forward by up to thousands of years. Part 3 of this series discusses the cause for this systematic bias. Since the measured values listed in Damon are not corrected for the magnitude of the bias, the 1988 C14 date for the Shroud of 1260 to 1390 AD should not be accepted as necessarily valid, so that the conclusion that the Shroud dates it the Middle Ages is not proven.
Paper 11 “The Carbon Dating Problem for the Shroud of Turin, Part 1: Background” by Robert A. Rucker, July 7, 2018
Abstract: In 1988, the C14 dating methodology was used to date samples from the Shroud of Turin to 1260 to 1390 AD. The problem with this date range is that it contradicts most other evidence which indicates that the Shroud of Turin is the authentic burial cloth of Jesus from the first century. To solve this carbon dating problem for the Shroud of Turin, a three-part series has been written that covers: 1) background, 2) statistical analysis, and 3) the neutron absorption hypothesis. This paper is part 1 in the series and covers background material that is needed to understand parts 2 and 3 in the series. Basics of radiation and the C14 dating methodology are discussed to help people understand the neutron absorption hypothesis. An extensive list of evidence is given why the C14 dating of the Shroud to the Middle Ages is not correct. A simplified example is given of measurements with and without a systematic bias, and the characteristics of the data analysis are explained that demonstrate when a systematic bias is present. This is required to understand the statistical analysis in Part 2 of this series.
Paper 10 “Proposal for C14 Dating of Charred Material Removed from the Shroud” by Robert A. Rucker, April 29, 2018
Abstract: In 1988 the Shroud was carbon dated to the Middle Ages, but much other evidence is consistent with a first century date. To resolve this discrepancy, this paper proposes that carbon dating be done on the charred material removed from the Shroud in 2002. Information that defines the appearance of a crucified man was required by the discoloration mechanism to encode the image onto the Shroud. There is good reason to believe that this information could only be transferred from the body to the cloth by a burst of radiation from within the body. It is hypothesized that this burst of radiation evidently included neutrons, some of which would have been absorbed by the linen to form new C14 atoms on the Shroud. An increase of only 16% in the C14 density at the sample location would shift the date from AD 30 to AD 1260. Using the MCNP nuclear analysis software, computer calculations were run based on this hypothesis. These computer calculations predict that the charred material from under the elbows should date to about AD 4000. If measurements are made on this material and the measurements are consistent with the predictions, the conclusion of the 1988 dating of the Shroud to the Middle Ages will be invalidated.
Paper 9 “Ideas for Research on the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, November 10, 2016
Abstract: This paper lists ideas for research that would be helpful to solve the main mysteries related to the Shroud of Turin. This suggested research includes questions to be considered, and ideas for calculations and experiments to be done. The ideas for this research come primarily from a review of the paper “Role of Radiation in Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin”.
Paper 8 “MCNP Analysis of Neutrons Released from Jesus’ Body in the Resurrection” by Robert A. Rucker, October 12, 2016
Abstract: This paper documents the results of nuclear analysis computer calculations performed using the MCNP computer software. These calculations were done to solve the carbon dating problem for the Shroud of Turin and were based on the neutron absorption hypothesis. This paper was presented Oct. 11, 2014 at the international conference on the Shroud of Turin, titled “Shroud of Turin: The Controversial Intersection of Faith and Science” held in St. Louis October 9-12, 2014. This presentation included 54 PowerPoint slides. This is the narration for these slides and is documented similar to that presented at the conference, allowing some flexibility for completeness and a few changes and corrections.
Paper 7 “Mr. Dotman in Lineland” by Robert A. Rucker, October 6, 2016
Abstract: This is a short fictional story of Mr. Dotman in Lineland to convey what is meant by a transition into an alternate dimensionality. This concept has application to the Shroud of Turin to help explain what may have happened, in physics terms, when Jesus’ body disappeared from within the Shroud. A study of the pros and cons of several options for how this could have happened was documented in “The Disappearance of Jesus’ Body Part 2: Physical Considerations”, which concluded that the most likely option that is within an extrapolation of concepts in modern physics is that Jesus’ body disappeared from within the Shroud by a transition into an alternate dimensionality. Please go to this previous paper for further information. The story of Mr. Dotman in Lineland was excerpted from pages 13 to 15 of this previous paper.
Paper 6 “Role of Radiation in Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, July 16, 2020
Abstract: Formation of the image on the Shroud required three things: a discoloration mechanism, energy, and information. There must have been some process or mechanism that caused discoloration on the top portions of the fibers that make up the image on the cloth. Energy would have been required for the functioning of the discoloration mechanism to alter the electron bonds of the carbon atoms in the cellulose molecules that caused the discoloration. And information defining the shape of the body and the presence of some of the bones was needed to guide the process so front and dorsal images with good resolution could be formed. It is argued that if we follow the evidence where it leads and not be constrained by a presupposition of naturalism, then we find the best explanation for the evidence is that the required energy was delivered to the Shroud by radiation emitted from within the body, and this radiation must have been vertically collimated both up and down. Seventeen reasons are given for this view. The radiation emitted from within the body, by means of its intensity and direction, carried the necessary information from the body to the cloth so the image could be formed. A working hypothesis is developed for this emission of radiation from within the body in terms of when, where, what, why, and how. Responses are given to multiple questions that arise regarding this working hypothesis. And lastly a two-step image formation mechanism is proposed based on radiation emitted from within the body, which caused a static discharge on the top portion of the fibers, which caused the discoloration of the fibers making up the images.
Paper 5 “Information Content on the Shroud of Turin” by Robert A. Rucker, October 11, 2016
Abstract: People can see the image of a crucified man on the Shroud of Turin because the threads of the Shroud contain fibers that are discolored in a pattern that contains the information content that defines the appearance of a crucified man. This information could only have come from the body that was wrapped within the Shroud, because this information was only inherent to the body and not to its surroundings. After considering the five possible options for how information can travel from one location to another (radiation, waves in a medium, direct contact, a flow of particles through physical connections, and diffusion of molecules), it is concluded that the only credible option for how this information could have been communicated from the body to the Shroud is by radiation (photons and/or particles) emitted from within the body which was then absorbed onto the Shroud.
Paper 4 “Review of ‘Test the Shroud’ by Mark Antonacci” by Robert A. Rucker, October 11, 2016
Abstract: This is a review of the book “Test the Shroud” by Mark Antonacci. This book summarizes the current status of research on the Shroud of Turin and the need for, nature of and expected results of further testing. Writing for the layman, he covers all areas of the subject including the most difficult areas related to the C14 dating, the image formation, and the blood transfer. His knowledge of references related to the Shroud is encyclopedic. And the main purpose of the book, to promote additional testing, is very timely.
Paper 3 “Review of ‘The Shroud of Turin: Radiation Effects, Aging, and Image Formation’ by Ray Rogers” by Robert A. Rucker, Giulio Fanti, Mark Antonacci, Tony Fleming, and Keith Propp, October 11, 2016
Abstract: This is a review of the 2005 paper “The Shroud of Turin: Radiation Effects, Aging, and Image Formation” by Ray Rogers. This paper was reviewed to determine the correctness of his methods and conclusions. This paper was evidently never published or peer reviewed, yet is frequently referenced. His main conclusion as stated in his abstract is that formation of the image on the Shroud of Turin “could not have involved energetic radiation of any kind; photons, electrons, protons, alpha particles, and/or neutrons.” Review of Rogers’ paper found that this conclusion is not justified by the evidence that is presented, and in fact, the certainty of this conclusion contradicts the tentativeness of his last sentence in the body of his paper: “I believe that the current evidence suggests that all radiation-based hypotheses for image formation will ultimately be rejected.” (Underlining added.) This contradiction may have resulted from Rogers not completing this paper due to his ill health and eventual death at the beginning of 2005. In contradiction to Rogers’ conclusion, this review also includes a summary of the reasons why radiation ought to be regarded as the most likely cause of the image on the Shroud of Turin.
Paper 2 “The Disappearance of Jesus’ Body, Part 2: Physical Considerations” by Robert A. Rucker, October 11, 2016
Abstract: This document deals with physical/scientific aspects of how Jesus’ body disappeared from the tomb. Seven physical processes that might have been involved in the disappearance of Jesus’ body from the tomb are considered based on the laws of science as we currently understand them and based on an extrapolation of those laws as suggested by aspects of modern physics. Consideration of the pros and cons for these proposed processes indicates that disintegration of the body and involvement of a wormhole should be rejected as possible mechanisms for how the body disappeared. It is concluded that a transition into an alternate dimensionality is the best option among the seven proposed processes for how Jesus’ body disappeared from the tomb, at least among those that are in any way related to our current understanding of the laws of physics. Of course, a yet undefined process that is beyond even an extrapolation of our current laws of science could be the cause of the disappearance of the body, but this option could not be scientifically assessed due to its vagueness.
Paper 1 “The Disappearance of Jesus’ Body, Part 1: Biblical and Theological Considerations” by Robert A. Rucker, October 8, 2016
Abstract: This study investigates how Jesus’ body disappeared from the tomb. In Part 1, which is this document, how Jesus’ body disappeared from the tomb is considered from the Biblical references to his resurrection and from the theology of resurrection throughout the Bible. The perspective is that of Biblical Christianity. It is concluded that in the resurrection, Jesus’ body underwent a basic transformation, a metamorphosis, from what Paul called a “natural body” to a “spiritual body”. As described by the change in the adjective from “natural” to “spiritual”, this basic transformation in Jesus’ body is what allowed his body to exit the shroud and the tomb without disturbing either. Physical considerations related to how Jesus’ body disappeared from the tomb are analyzed in Part 2.
| |