Does the Shroud of Turin Show Expected Elongation of the Head in 2D?"

pgwenthold said:
What would be the rate of reaction at these temperatures?

If you knew anything about chemistry (your failed attempt to calculate the amount of contamination needed does call that into question) you would know that the question is not "can the reaction happen" but how fast it does it happen.

For something like a Maillard reaction, I'm sure that there is a pretty detailed kinetics profile that has been measured (I always tell my students, food scientists really know their ◊◊◊◊) so the full set of Arrhenius is probably known. We probably need to do some estimates of the composition.

But just to get an idea of whether it's reasonable, we ask the question - if I set a piece of bread at whatever temp you think is right and leave it there for 36 hours, will it toast? As I said above, it will certainly dry out, but that's not a Maillard reaction.
Click to expand...
Why start an experiment to measure the rate of a Maillard reaction without the necessary reactants?
 
zooterkin said:
Do you imagine that brushes are the only way to apply pigment?
Click to expand...
The image is composed of discoloration of the surface of the linen fibers to a depth of 400 nanometers.

file:///C:/Users/bobdr/Downloads/JIST_2010_art00001_G_-Fanti.pdf

Fanti again, but look at the pictures, they tell a thousand stories.
 
bobdroege7 said:
Why start an experiment to measure the rate of a Maillard reaction without the necessary reactants?
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? I didn't say anything about running an experiment, I said we should calculate the rate of the reaction. I'm presuming that the Arrhenius parameters are known so we can calculate the reaction rate at whatever temperature you think is relevant to see if that reaction would occur in your chosen timeframe.

There's a paper here


that finds the rate constant to be essentially zero (unmeasurable reaction) at 60 degrees C. But it's only one paper and I don't think it's the full story, but it's rate data that you don't have.
 
bobdroege7 said:
I have offered evidence that the reaction could occur at room temperature...
Click to expand...
No. You offered the opinion of an online baker, which left out the second of the two premises for your hypothesis: how long it would take.

bobdroege7 said:
...and that the conditions of the man in the shroud was higher than that.
Click to expand...
No. You cited a maximum meteorological temperature for Israel and did not address contravening data.

Regardless, the ingredients for the Maillard reaction you are claiming are easily obtained, and the conditions easily achieved. The fact that neither you nor anyone else has reproduced the shroud by the means you are claiming is ample evidence that your "theoretical" reaction is not likely.
 
bobdroege7 said:
You don't read my citations, so why should I bother.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
I take it from that pathetic attempt to distract that, despite your frantic googling, you have been unable to find any such examples.

Another nail in the proverbial coffin of the Lirey cloth.
bobdroege7 said:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Click to expand...
And yet you claimed you had such examples.

Curious isn't it, that not one example of herringbone weave has survived. It's as if such cloth didn't exist in first century Judea......
bobdroege7 said:
Go back to school and ask for a refund, or you might have an issue with your h key.
Click to expand...
Oh look, more childish insults and attempt at distraction.
bobdroege7 said:
Get your where, were, wear, and we're right.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
Your tantrums don't interest me. You continual failure to support your claims with evidence really expose your inadequacies.


So, now that you've accepted your failure, how about addressing your claims regarding two other radiocarbon datings?
 
bobdroege7 said:
I don't think these various unnamed experts actually had any input into the selection of the location of the sample.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
Oh look another unsupported opinion.

And let's not forget the examinations of the Lirey cloth subsequent to the radiocarbon dating. Still no magic patch.

bobdroege7 said:
If the contamination is actually threads due to reweaves, patches or other alterations, then the threads would not be affected by any of the cleaning methods you describe.
Click to expand...
So you're changing your argument, again?

But let's indulge your drivel for a moment; just how much extraneous material would have to be added to the cloth again? Wouldn't that be just a trifle obvious?

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

bobdroege7 said:
And what McCrone found were precipitates, not pigments.
Click to expand...
Not true.
bobdroege7 said:
Other researchers found no pigments on the shroud,
Click to expand...
Also not true.
bobdroege7 said:
and the image is sepia colored.
Click to expand...
So? Other than showing it wasn't created by blood what is this supposed to show?
 
bobdroege7 said:
The image is composed of discoloration of the surface of the linen fibers to a depth of 400 nanometers.

file:///C:/Users/bobdr/Downloads/JIST_2010_art00001_G_-Fanti.pdf

Fanti again, but look at the pictures, they tell a thousand stories.
Click to expand...
Seriously? Can you not learn how to upload or link to a file properly?
 
catsmate said:
So, now that you've accepted your failure, how about addressing your claims regarding two other radiocarbon datings?
Click to expand...
I already posted that in post 1401.

See I told you, you don't read my cites.

Why don't you post some light reading that supports any of your claims.
 
bobdroege7 said:
I already posted that in post 1401.
Click to expand...
No you didn't.

Firstly that document (as I have said previously) is full of absolute drivel, the usual shroudie unsupported assertions, leavened with distortions and outright lies. There are nonsensical claims regarding the Geneva lab introducing contamination into the sample. There is no evidence provided for this lie, of course.

Secondly Marinelli is, as previously pointed out, an idiot. Remember her assertions regarding gravity?
bobdroege7 said:
See I told you, you don't read my cites.
Click to expand...
I did. This "paper" doesn't support your claims.
bobdroege7 said:
Why don't you post some light reading that supports any of your claims.
Click to expand...
I have.
 
bobdroege7 said:
And that could be achieved by applying pigment?
Click to expand...
Yep. As was shown by the duplication of the cloth.
bobdroege7 said:
Yes
Click to expand...
So we can add the characteristics of Maillard reactions to the long list of subjects you don't understand.

JayUtah said:
Please provide details, including the identity of the reactants, the reaction rates, the reaction products, and the physical chemistry principles that would limit the penetration of the effect to 400 nm.
Click to expand...
This might be interesting....
 
catsmate said:
This might be interesting....
Click to expand...
I'm looking forward to the explanation. Deposition in general produces thinner residue layers after the deponent has flaked away. The Maillard reaction is proposed to require chemicals in the substrate as part of the reaction. The substrate participates in a reaction instead of merely being an inert platform for deposited substances. To compare, chromic anodization (a process that interacts chemically with the surface material) is on the order of 20-70 μm, or almost 200 times thicker than the image on the shroud.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom