Chemistry of Images on the Shroud of Turin: 2008

Shroud of Turin Chemistry of the Images

A single image fiber from the Shroud of Turin Some of the cellulose fibers that when twisted together make up the threads of the Shroud's cloth are coated with a thin carbohydrate layer of starch fractions and various sugars. This chemical layer, which is about as thick as the transparent scratch-resistant coatings used for eye glasses, is essentially colorless and is found only on the outermost fibers near the surface. In some places, the layer has undergone a chemical change that appears straw-yellow. This chemical change is similar to the change that takes place when sugar is heated to make caramel or when proteins react with sugar giving beer its color. And it is the straw-yellow, selectively present in some parts of the carbohydrate layer, that makes up the image we see on the Shroud. When scientists speak of image fibers they are referring to the coating on lengths of fiber that have undergone this chemical change.

Ray Rogers (see curriculum vitae summary below) responds to the question: "How do you know that the flax fibers were not involved in image formation?"

Prof. Alan Adler of Western Connecticut University found that the image color could be reduced with a diimide reagent, leaving colorless, undamaged linen fibers behind. This confirmed spectral data that indicated that the image color was a result of complex conjugated double bonds; however, it proved that image color was found only on the outer surfaces of colored image fibers. Until this time, we had assumed that the image color was a result of chemical changes in the cellulose of the linen. The most likely change would involve the dehydration of the cellulose to produce conjugated-double-bond systems Adler's observations proved that the cellulose was not involved in image formation. This is an extremely important observation.

Ray Rogers (see curriculum vitae summary below) responds to the question: "How do you know that the flax fibers were not involved in image formation?"

This fact was confirmed by the observation that the image color on some fibers had been stripped off of their surfaces by the adhesive of the sampling tapes. The photomicrograph shows the places where two fibers were pulled out of the adhesive leaving their colored coating behind. The coating is too thin to measure accurately with a standard microscope; however, it appears to be 200-600 nanometers thick (in the range of a wavelength of visible light).

The bands of color and the fact that all of the image color appears only on the outer surfaces of the fibers, suggested that image formation involved a thin layer of impurities. Because the cellulose was not colored, the impurities had to be significantly less stable than cellulose.

This also suggested that the impurities were the result of cloth-production methods, and they should appear on all parts of the cloth. A search for carbohydrate impurities on the Shroud confirmed McCrone's detection of some starch fractions. Starch and low-molecular-weight carbohydrates from crude starch would color much more easily than would cellulose as a result of either thermal dehydration or chemical reactions.

Any image-formation mechanism that would result in color formation inside the linen fibers must be rejected. Some "theories" that have been mentioned that would cause coloration inside fibers are penetrating radiation, high temperature scorching (hot statue, painting with a torch, etc.), and catalyzed dehydration of the cellulose. Image fibers are colored only on their surfaces.

Shroud of Turin Facts Check More Facts

Much of the scientific material on this site is based on the work of Ray Rogers. Rogers, a chemist, is a science Fellow of the University of California, Los Alamos National Laboratory and a charter member of the Coalition for Excellence in Science Education. He has published many scientific papers in peer-reviewed journals and U.S. Government publications. In 1978, together with several other scientists, he was invited to personally examine the Shroud of Turin in Italy for several days. He collected numerous measurements and samples of fibers and particulate materials for further study. Rogers died March 8, 2005..

Editorial Comment

There is little question among those familiar with the topic that the biggest mistake ever made in carbon 14 dating was the Shroud of Turin.

Sadly, this mistake will be understood by some as meaning that carbon 14 dating is prone to error, subject to unexplainable anomalies or plagued by problems of contamination; none of which is true.

Let's be perfectly clear: carbon 14 dating is an excellent and very accurate scientific method for determining the age of many things as old as 50,000 years.

The failure to obtain a reliable date for the Shroud of Turin is not about flaws in carbon 14 dating methods or contamination. It is not about the problems, so often discussed in the media, of mysterious biological polymers growing on the cloth's fibers or new carbon introduced into the Shroud's cloth by a scorching fire in 1532.

It is not about the sloppy work by three very prestigious carbon 14 dating laboratories. And it is not, as some suggest, about conspiracies dreamed up to prove religious or anti-religious arguments (the Shroud is a religious object for some).

It is about a stupid mistake.

Let me illustrate: Recently I sent a soil sample to a testing laboratory to find out why my lawn was doing so poorly. The lab reported back that the soil was perfect for grass. It had the right nutrients and the pH was right on target, neither too acidic or alkaline.

I didn't think so. What had gone wrong?

It turns out that a few weeks earlier I had repaired a spot in my lawn where my dog had peed and killed the grass. I dug out a small section of soil and filled the hole with loam I had purchased from a garden supply store. Without realizing it, I had taken a sample for testing from that repaired area.

The sample was not representative of my lawn. It was chemically unlike the rest of my lawn. The lab had perfectly analyzed an invalid sample.

Similarly, as we now know, from National Geographic News, PBS and several scientific papers, that the carbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin was done with an invalid sample.

M. Sue Benford and Joseph G. Marino, with the help of several textile experts, undertook a detailed examination of the documentation photographs of the carbon 14 samples and identified clear indications of a medieval patch.

Independently, Ray Rogers, a Fellow of the University of California, Los Alamos National Laboratory and a charter member of the Coalition for Excellence in Science Education has examined actual threads and fibers adjacent to where the samples were snipped. In a paper he published with Anna Arnoldi of the University of Milan, Rogers reported finding indisputable chemical evidence of a repair patch. He found dyestuff and spliced threads. Others, using scanning electronic microscopes and advanced spectral analysis tools have confirmed his findings.

This mistake of using an invalid sample should not be allowed to tarnish the reputation of carbon 14 dating. Unfortunately, we live in a world of easy and careless polemics. There are some, as well, who because of religious convictions cannot accept the conclusions of carbon 14 dating. Scientists cannot properly challenge matters of faith on the basis of science alone. But it would be unfortunate if those who hold certain beliefs use an erroneous understanding about carbon 14 dating to challenge carbon 14 dating when it is not carbon 14 dating that is at fault.

The mistake must now be openly admitted in the interest of scientific integrity. It was a careless mistake, a stupid mistake, a foolish mistake.

Carbon 14 dating is an invaluable tool for archeology and science. The mistake made in dating the Shroud of Turin does not diminish this fact.

In 1898 Secondo Pia discovered the negative properties of the picture of Jesus on the Shroud

Presented by:

Shroud of Turin Story
History, Science and Many Topics

Science

Shroud of Turin face as it appears when photographed. This is the negative.

Face on the Shroud as it appears when photographed. This is the negative.

Gum encrusted cotton fiber found only in the carbon 14 sample area and not elsewhere on the Shroud of Turin.

Spliced thread in the carbon 14 sample area of the Shroud of Turin

Close up view of spliced thread in the carbon 14 sample area

Microscopic view of fibers from the carbon 14 area when dissolved in water.

Photomicrograph, gum is swelling and slowly detaching from the fibers and alizarin mordant lakes can be seen. Yellow dye is in solution.

Phase Constrast Microscopy of a single image fiber from the Shroud of Turin

Phase Constrast Microscopy of a single image fiber from the Shroud of Turin

Phase-contrast microscopy of a single image fiber. Image is a reddish-brown caramel-like complex carbon bond, a chemical change within a super thin coating of crude starch on the fabric's outermost fibers. It is not paint or any kind of applied pigment. It is likely caused by bodily amine vapors reacting with saccharides in the starch.

Threads consisting of twisted bundles of fibers. Shows color in starch coating

This is how the face appears on the Shroud of Turin.

Second face image found on the backside of the cloth in 2004

Second face image found on the backside of the cloth in 2004

Second face image recently discovered with image analysis technology. This a a computer enhanced view. It matches the face on the front of the Shroud. The images are doubly-superficial meaning that nothing soaked through.

Picture of the Shroud of Turin

Shroud of Turin Chemistry of the Images

Shroud of Turin

Patch on the Shroud

Editorial Comment

LINKS

Science