"The Shroud of Turin will always be a mystery to science"
The age of the famous Shroud of Turin is about 2 thousand years old, which indicates its authenticity. These are the results of an X-ray analysis of the canvas, which is supposed to have wrapped the body of Jesus Christ after the crucifixion, conducted by Italian scientists. This discovery was a revolution in the scientific world, as previous studies using the carbon method showed that the shroud was created in the Middle Ages and, therefore, it is a fake. In an exclusive interview with Izvestia, scientist Liberato De Caro from the Institute of Crystallography of the National Research Council told Russian journalists in detail for the first time what facts speak in favor of the antiquity of the shrine, and also explained why previous studies could be erroneous.
"We have developed a new technique to study the Shroud of Turin"
— What scientific methods can generally be used to study ancient artifacts?
— There are many methods to analyze the order in matter. As we see on the screen, the human eye has a certain resolution — fractions of a millimeter. Then we have an optical microscope, as well as an electron microscope, which allows us to see the structure at the atomic level in very thin samples. We can distinguish details less than a billionth of a meter in size, which is really incredible.
If we want to explore matter on an even deeper level, we can turn to X-ray crystallography. X-rays have the ability to penetrate into matter, like X-rays, and provide information about the structure at the atomic level. For example, the discovery of DNA was made possible by crystallography and X-rays.
Crystallography does not form a direct image of atoms, but reveals the waves they create. This can be compared to trying to measure the length of a floating snake without seeing it itself, but only the waves it produces. If the snake is long, it will create wider and more intense waves, and if it is short, they will be smaller.
— Which of these did you use to study the shroud?
— Why is this example so important? To study the Shroud of Turin, we have developed a new technique based on X-rays. It allows you to measure the average length of cellulose polymer chains, which become shorter over time. By measuring the average length of these chains, we can understand how ancient the sample in front of us is.
We cannot see the polymer chains themselves, but we can observe the waves they generate. It's like a snake situation.: We can't see it, but we can see the waves it produces.
What are we doing with this information? We are analyzing the intensity of these waves. This is a typical diffraction pattern created by linen, made from flax pulp, which is part of the fabric of the Shroud of Turin. And we see the intensity of these waves.
— How can we understand the age of the object due to this?
— To understand how high the peaks of the waves are, we used samples that have already been dated using a known method. We measured how the radiation intensity decreases with the age of the samples.
The black sample is a modern one, dating back to our era. Blue — was dated to 3200 BC, which makes it very ancient. Among the intermediate—age samples, there is a green one, which has a history of about 2 thousand years, and a red one - about 1,500 years. These samples were obtained as a result of the interaction of X-rays with cellulose, more precisely, with its polymer categories.
One of the analyzed samples is the Shroud of Turin and the diffraction pattern that appears on its surface. The magenta color indicates the intensity of diffraction waves emanating from this sample. Interestingly, the intensity profile of the waves obtained from the Shroud of Turin perfectly overlaps the intensity of the green sample. This green specimen dates back to the 1st century AD and was taken from a fortress that, as we know from Roman history, fell into Roman hands in 74 AD. The sample was dated to 65 AD.
Since the profile perfectly overlaps this green pattern, it can be concluded that the Shroud of Turin has a two-thousand-year history. This is the result obtained using a new X-ray technique that makes it possible to date samples.
"Science studies natural phenomena, but not supernatural ones"
— What is the significance of this data for science?
— The result obtained using the new X-ray technique is of great importance, as it can be applied to all fabrics and textile samples of archaeological interest. He refuted the results obtained in 1988 using carbon-14, which indicated that the Shroud of Turin dates back to the Middle Ages. This once again raised the question of the authenticity of the Turin Shroud.
It also raises questions for researchers. Some believe that this phenomenon cannot be explained from a scientific point of view, since it is associated with an incomprehensible event — the resurrection of Christ.
Of course, science studies natural phenomena, but not supernatural ones. Those who do not believe in such phenomena are trying to prejudice the results of the studies of the Shroud of Turin. Because the new results are causing discomfort, as we cannot scientifically explain all aspects.
"Like what?"
— There are no visible signs of body deformation on the Turin shroud. To create a bas-relief resembling a human face, a stamp was used on the shroud. The result is an image without lateral deformations, as on the shroud itself. However, if I look at the image in depth, I see that it does not have a three-dimensional structure.
The Shroud of Turin depicts a three-dimensional face, and I can only reproduce some of its features with the help of bas-reliefs. I can recreate the absence of lateral deformations, but I cannot convey the depth of the image. This makes it difficult for us to understand the phenomenon of the Shroud of Turin, despite the fact that we live in the third millennium of Christian history.
— How long have scientists been trying to figure out the age of the shroud using modern methods, and why do debates about this continue to this day?
— The issue of carbon-14 dating has been a matter of debate for a long time. In the late 1970s, a research project was implemented. As part of it, more than 30 scientists studied the Shroud of Turin, and all the evidence seemed to confirm its authenticity.
In 1988, carbon-14 dating was carried out, and everyone expected it to confirm that the shroud was 2,000 years old. However, instead, a result was obtained that pointed to medieval dating. This was an unexpected result and caused a lot of reactions. Many scientists have delved into the study of data from three laboratories: Oxford, Tucson and Zurich. They had samples to compare the carbon-14 content.
Studying the data, the scientists emphasized that the samples could have been contaminated. In order to carry out reliable carbon-14 dating, samples must first be purified using special procedures. However, the textile structure, such as linen, has many gaps that may contain carbon pollution from later eras. These contaminants cannot be completely eliminated using sample cleaning methods, which makes it difficult to date textile samples correctly.
If a textile sample has been stored in isolation, such as the bandages of an Egyptian mummy that have been sealed and insulated for thousands of years, then carbon-14 dating is accurate and allows you to get the correct date.
However, in the case of the Shroud of Turin, which has always been in the spotlight, public performances were held even in 1978 for three months. If I remember correctly, it was from August to October 1978, when the 400th anniversary of the arrival of the shroud in Turin was celebrated. At that time, the atmosphere contained a lot of carbon-14, which was especially difficult to eliminate from textile samples that were not stored in isolation. Many have come to the conclusion that three laboratories in Oxford, Zurich and Tucson were unable to make a definitive dating.
Those who defend carbon-14 dating argue that pollution levels must be too high to explain the 1,200-year shift, from 2,000 to 800 years ago. This is an open discussion that divides scientists all over the world again.
"Science cannot explain how the image appeared on the Shroud of Turin"
— Almost 50 years have passed since the beginning of these studies. What modern technologies can give us clear answers?
— Artificial intelligence is an opportunity to maximize the potential of scientific knowledge in our time. However, as I said earlier, the Shroud of Turin is not explained from a scientific point of view. Because AI is based on our scientific knowledge, it may have the same difficulty explaining and understanding how body image formed.
For example, in 2010, an experiment was conducted by a very interesting professor Luigi Garlaschelli. He took a volunteer, covered him with red paint and wrapped him in a sheet. As a result, we got the image that can be seen on the right. This is a very distorted image, and not what can be seen on the Shroud of Turin.
This Garlaschelli experiment proves that our science cannot explain how the image appeared on the Shroud of Turin. Therefore, even artificial intelligence is not able to do this.
— What point of view do you personally hold?
— Personally, even after I learned about the new research results and the difficulties faced by science in explaining the properties of the visible body image on the shroud, based on the well-known laws of nature, I continue to believe that the shroud is genuine and that it really had the body of Jesus of Nazareth at the time of his burial.
However, as a believer, I also believe that there is something beyond the laws of nature that Christians associate with the resurrection of Christ. At the same time, we must recognize that science is not always able to explain supernatural phenomena.
We cannot ask science to explain an event like the resurrection that cannot be reproduced in a laboratory. This is a unique phenomenon, and I don't think science can answer it.
Therefore, the Shroud of Turin will always be a mystery to science. Who knows, perhaps with the development of future research methods, even more advanced than the current ones, this mystery will become a little more understandable. But, as John Paul II said, it is a mirror of the Gospel, because it describes the Passion of Christ from the Gospel. And this is not only a mystery, but also a challenge, and thank God for that.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
