RETURN of the Nuclear Engineer & The Shroud of Turin | feat. Robert Rucker

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 21 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 102

  • @Mairiain
    @Mairiain 17 днів тому +9

    As a child of a chemistry professor and someone who has taken two years each of general and organic chemistry, this was excellent and so insightful. Thank you!

  • @neiltravis5101
    @neiltravis5101 2 дні тому +6

    I saw the Shroud of Torrent for the first time when I was a kid, and I am 62 years old today. I knew that it was Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Amen.

  • @HubSheep
    @HubSheep 15 днів тому +12

    I don't have a clue what this guy said, but I know Christ rose!!

  • @shadowhawk22
    @shadowhawk22 День тому +1

    Really good idea to have a follow up chat with questions. I am looking forward to watching that!

  • @DEE-qu5mc
    @DEE-qu5mc 20 днів тому +20

    Before I become a little critical, I'd like to say that I very much enjoy Mr Rucker's analysis, it's fascinating.
    I keep hearing people referring to the image as 'The crucified man in the shroud', he has a name, his name is Jeshua (Jesus) say it! now I understand that you cannot say for certain who it is, BUT who else in history has been crucified in such a way? Who else had a crown of thorns placed on his head, and had a spear wound to the side of his body?

    • @shannonhenson609
      @shannonhenson609 18 днів тому +4

      Flogging and crucifixions were extremely common in ancient Rome, as was the spear thrust into the side of the victim to make sure he was dead, before they brought him down to be buried. The crown of thorns is the only unique part of the crucifixion of Jesus.

    • @DEE-qu5mc
      @DEE-qu5mc 18 днів тому +6

      @shannonhenson609 It was not 'extremely common', they did it sometimes, as they also sometimes broke their legs.
      But what is mostly unique by far, is obviously the image formation on the cloth, there isn't anything like it in existence.

    • @georgetravers9333
      @georgetravers9333 12 днів тому +1

      Snuff iconology?
      Where else do all the Holy Relics come from?

    • @davidgallahair1206
      @davidgallahair1206 11 днів тому +2

      @@DEE-qu5mc its ok to be critical and speak your mind. Can we say with certainty this is the burial shroud of Jesus? I cant because I do not have enough real data about the shroud. Do I think this is the shroud of Jesus? Yes I do but I can't prove it yet beyond a reasonable doubt.
      Keep the faith DEE!

    • @CC-uq4hu
      @CC-uq4hu 11 днів тому +2

      Yeshua Adonai ❤

  • @LaurenRispoli-f7m
    @LaurenRispoli-f7m 18 днів тому +10

    Since energy was required to start the endothermic reaction I propose it was the hand of God.

  • @aneyesky
    @aneyesky День тому +1

    This is the time of Grace. Of the Gentiles. We must go into the world to preach the gospel of Christ. What a great way to start a conversation with the more “ intellectual “ type of friend. Praise Jesus!

  • @yvonnecampbell7036
    @yvonnecampbell7036 9 днів тому +4

    1 Corinthians 15:51-53 "Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed- in an instant, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For the perishable must be clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality.…"

  • @WinItReigns
    @WinItReigns 20 днів тому +5

    And the discoloration hypothesis is astounding.

  • @davidgallahair1206
    @davidgallahair1206 20 днів тому +15

    if the image was formed when the shroud was wrapped snuggly on the body would we not see a distorted image when the cloth was flattened out thereafter? The image we see presently suggests it was formed while the cloth was very flat above and below the body as there are no distorted image parts due to wrinkled, wrapped or bundled cloth.
    Or have I missed something important?
    Thanks for the vids Mike.

    • @brentbrouwer6135
      @brentbrouwer6135 18 днів тому +3

      There was a tv examination of the shroud that sought to reconstruct the face that made the image that is on the cloth. You can find that image if you google something like forensic or digital examination of the shoud image.

    • @sliglusamelius8578
      @sliglusamelius8578 18 днів тому +7

      Since we have no idea how the image was actually formed, even if a radiation event, and since it must be a miracle, it can be any way God wants it to be.

    • @davidgallahair1206
      @davidgallahair1206 18 днів тому +2

      @sliglusamelius8578 thats true and I appreciate your view. I'm simply fascinated by this item and just chasing down the angles to possibly find unasked questions and others observations, such as yours!
      Thanks!

    • @DavidCohen-p9m
      @DavidCohen-p9m 17 днів тому

      Absolutely. Completely over scientific. The image would be distorted and there would be a gap between front and back head images. It's undoubtedly a fake.

    • @wungabunga
      @wungabunga 13 днів тому +2

      @@davidgallahair1206 It's a valid and good question, my friend. Perhaps recreations/3d models took account of this.

  • @GodDutyHonorCountry
    @GodDutyHonorCountry 17 днів тому +7

    The FACT that ONLY the outermost surface area of the thread/fibers were affected (discolored) = is very compelling!

    • @davidgallahair1206
      @davidgallahair1206 11 днів тому +1

      @@GodDutyHonorCountry agreed. it is beyond a curiosity.

  • @andrewdurkovic8409
    @andrewdurkovic8409 11 днів тому +4

    Well I don’t understand it all, but I would love to hear a panel discussion into Rucker’s theory with multiple physicists on both sides of the Christian faith. Perhaps we could also have Rucker address any peer review of his various papers. In any case, I think we are comfortably beyond any credible forgery argument.

  • @tymmiara5967
    @tymmiara5967 18 днів тому +6

    I hold a PhD (and masters) in physics and I am a Christian, but there are a good number of issues I have with this explanation, and in the spirit of his statement "a hypothesis must explain all the facts we know already" I would raise these four comments (I have plenty more, but I'll stick to the topic specific to his explanation):
    Since when is linen an "electrical conductor" for the electrical current to flow on its surface? Flow of electrons alone is difficult to argue let alone on its surface.
    Also, he said that teeth were absorbent. Therefore, we should expect them to be darker (in the negative of the shroud shown in the slides), any absorbing medium should be darker and any emitting volume should be brighter.
    The problem with all colimated beams is that in the absence of absorbing medium, their brightness does not decay at any cross-section of the beam. For example, a well-collimated laser light will appear just as bright 1m away as 1km away. He argues that what we are seeing is the effect of absorption of air between the Proton-neutron source (from splitting deuterium) and the cloth.
    The trouble is, the when I crunch the numbers (the scattering absorption of air being about 2 barns and the number density of atoms is well known) , the mean free path of a low-energy (thermal) neutron through air is around 50 meters. This means that the air gap of around 5cm cm will absorb only 0.1% of the radiation. This predicts that the discolouration on the eyes (less that 5cm) compared to the nose (directly in contact) should only be less than 0.1% weaker which is not the case. Basically, the type of radiation he proposes would not produce enough contrast for us to distinguish between the nose and the eyes or any other features and it disagrees with the strong (of the order of tens of percent) discolouration differences on the shroud. The air is not nearly absorbent enough to protons/neurons to encode the air gap thickness information on these scales.
    If he had proposed electrons, then maybe, (I'd have to check), but he didn't and he didn't offer any even back of an envelope maths to support his claim.
    Last but not least, hair is already dead, so it needs no resurrection. Why is hair clearly the brightest on the image?

    • @bpd8426
      @bpd8426 18 днів тому +2

      Could the shroud been wet from sweat water or some blood making electrical flow on the surface possible?

    • @bpd8426
      @bpd8426 18 днів тому

      This other question I have is sort of wacky, but hear me out 😂 The ufo craft is hypothesized to beam a body into a craft, and is it possible the electromagnetic radiation of the body flowing through the fabric leave the impression. I don’t believe it this, but have thought about it.

    • @tymmiara5967
      @tymmiara5967 17 днів тому +3

      @@bpd8426 as to the first question, we need to remember that the resurrection happened more than 24h after the body was laid in the tomb, the cloth would have been dry by now.
      Your idea with a beam from the outside cannot work, just as he said. It would not deposit the information of the shape of the body on the shroud. It would be just a dark patch with no features. Moreover, it would have discoloured the linen through and through since the beam needs to penetrate completely through the linen to reach the body.
      If we are considering radiation hypotheses, it had to originate from the body.

    • @manuelobster
      @manuelobster 14 днів тому +1

      For the pontential distortion that should have been in the shroud I have this theory:
      Progressive Radiation Emission and Proportionality
      If we imagine that the radiation emanated from the body continuously and in all directions, with intensity proportional to the proximity of the cloth, it could have created a more accurate projection, similar to the effect observed in orthopantomography. In this case, the Shroud's cloth would have "recorded" the image according to the intensity of the radiation over time, rather than receiving a single "burst" that would have caused more obvious distortions.
      This model would explain how the cloth, even though it was wrapped around the body in a curved form, could have recorded a proportionate image without significant distortion. It is as if each point on the cloth acted as a "local detector," adjusting the intensity based on the distance to the body, creating a flatter effect in the final image.

    • @tymmiara5967
      @tymmiara5967 14 днів тому +1

      @@manuelobster what does time of exposure have to do with geometry?
      Geometry is not affected by whether it was a burst or a long process. It's only a result of the direction. Whether the radiation was colimated or not.
      You seem to be claiming it was not. Unfortunately, as stated in the video (and I agree), a non-collimated radiation would cause a blurry image.
      For example, if you removed a lens from a camera and too pictures, they would be so blurry as to be completely illegible. This is because each point on the imaged object radiates in all directions, so it irradiates many different points on the screen. Consequently, each point on the screen receives signal from multiple sources and it all becomes a blur.
      Orthopantomography works by producing a series of colimated beams that pass radially inwards and then outwards through the head.
      The problem is that, if you look at such images you will immediately see they are nothing like an image on the shroud. Look at one and pay attention to how extremely wide the jawbone appears on these tomographies. These are actually very much like face texture maps and this is what the shroud ought to look like, but it doesn't. Your solution doesn't solve anything. It suffers from the same problem.

  • @alurker3985
    @alurker3985 17 днів тому +4

    More and more I am of the opinion is that the Shroud was intended for us, for our time, and for the future. In the past people possessed easy belief in God and Jesus; nowadays, people are more cynical, less inclined to believe in God and the existence of Jesus. The figure formed within the Shroud was not that obvious to people in the past; however, with modern Science, the image is properly revealed and the mystery of Jesus' resurrection made clear.

  • @Non.Nobis.Domine
    @Non.Nobis.Domine 18 днів тому +3

    Thanks Mike.

  • @inttubu1
    @inttubu1 17 днів тому +3

    The fact that the front and dorsal images have the same characteristics implies that the body floated above the lower shroud and was not in touch with it when the photograph as it were was created

    • @CC-uq4hu
      @CC-uq4hu 11 днів тому +1

      Exactly…there’s no squash marks of calves in the image. It has to be suspended

  • @truincanada
    @truincanada 19 днів тому +2

    Please please pls come back around to implications with Dr. Rucker!!

  • @WinItReigns
    @WinItReigns 20 днів тому +11

    He really opened up this conversation very well. Speaking right to the point on the carbon dating topic.
    Sometimes, it seems a bit overwhelming and possibly confusing for someone who has no foreknowledge on both carbon dating and discussing neutrons.
    I wonder something...
    Does anyone think it's possible that when the particular section was selected for dating, was it done so because there was a hypothesis that it would in fact point to a later date, simply because it was a rewoven piece of cloth.
    Meaning that some people desired to have the Shroud seem like it couldn't possibly belong to Jesus. In a maliciously calculated manner.
    Even if that was so, with Mr. Rucker provides excellent scientific calculation and explanation. Essentially canceling out the "hopes" of some who desired to steal faith away from the Shroud.
    I pray The information provided by Bob Rucker become widely recognized and accepted by many with joy.
    Praise Jesus. King of Kings. Our Amazing Lord.
    And, the greatest of friends. 😊
    God Bless

    • @charlesjoyce982
      @charlesjoyce982 16 днів тому

      I bet freemasons were the one who examined it.
      Seriously.
      They would not want the authenticity of the shroud to be verified.
      Freemasons still control the vatican.
      That would be why the vatican wont allow the shroud to be looked at again.

  • @inttubu1
    @inttubu1 17 днів тому +3

    I used to criticise Catholics for their reverence of relics. But just imagine had the reformation got the upper hand and all the relics were destroyed. Just think of that. And Dieci e Lode (Kudos) to Rucker… I have seen countless presentations and I think this beats them all.

  • @WinItReigns
    @WinItReigns 23 дні тому +2

    Im Stoked

  • @inttubu1
    @inttubu1 17 днів тому +3

    Imagine the first photograph ever was that of Jesus!

  • @jacquelinejacobson6789
    @jacquelinejacobson6789 День тому

    I would love for your guest to analyze the image of the woman on the tilma of Juan Diego of Guadalupe in the 1500's.

  • @RoundSomeStuff
    @RoundSomeStuff 18 днів тому +1

    FWIW and at the risk of muddying the waters the writings of Maria Valtorta describe the Shroud and the energy involved in the formation of the image, remembering that the wounds are not part of the image per se.

  • @cellevangiel5973
    @cellevangiel5973 17 днів тому +3

    You can carbon date the shroud, but the primary question is, how was the picture created ? We don't know and we can not reproduce it. So what are you proving with your carbon daring ??

  • @whyaskwhybuddry
    @whyaskwhybuddry 16 днів тому +4

    The c14 test was already debunked because they botched the statistical and didn't see the cotton fibers interwoven in the sample.
    The one and only clipping was a repair patch and not representative of the entire image area

  • @jacquelinejacobson6789
    @jacquelinejacobson6789 День тому

    So in the carbon dating of 1978, was there an error in the section they took to analyze?

  • @davidgallahair1206
    @davidgallahair1206 20 днів тому +1

    How much does The Shroud itself weigh and its cubic volume in cm/in?
    Thanks for the vids and experts discussing this relic Mike.

    • @TheGraciousGuest
      @TheGraciousGuest  20 днів тому +2

      I'm not sure about the weight. I'll have to look into that!

    • @davidgallahair1206
      @davidgallahair1206 20 днів тому +1

      @TheGraciousGuest thanks Mike im researching as well

    • @kathierouse6046
      @kathierouse6046 3 дні тому

      I'm so glad this video appeared on my feed! I have a set of DVDs on the shroud put together by Russ Breault. Fascinating information!

  • @truincanada
    @truincanada 19 днів тому +2

    Comprehensive evidence .

  • @jeffreymcmillan7703
    @jeffreymcmillan7703 3 дні тому

    Jason Brashear does an interesting analysis on his ARCHAIX Channel.

  • @oldmanandguitar
    @oldmanandguitar 17 днів тому +5

    I totally believe it's real, but what is more powerful, in my opinion, is the fact that a lot of those who had seen Jesus reserected ended up being persecuted and went to their deaths confident of salvation. Happy, many with no fear. Only seeing Jesus reserected makes sense.

  • @inttubu1
    @inttubu1 17 днів тому +2

    We used to believe utterly in Jesus and everything he said. Now we no longer believe we know.

  • @JohnSmith-pl5te
    @JohnSmith-pl5te 20 годин тому

    The shroud is dated to the 1300's, that hasn't changed.

  • @stendekemalheiroshugo1238
    @stendekemalheiroshugo1238 18 днів тому +1

    First energy has been transformed into light, then it comes as special laser effect , the result is 4.dimensional photo😉

  • @thomasmyers9128
    @thomasmyers9128 День тому +2

    The was a new test WAXS wide angle x-ray scattering and it dated the shroud to 50-70 AD……. Not sure of the percentage of +\- but that’s within
    17 years of Christ resurrection

    • @TheGraciousGuest
      @TheGraciousGuest  День тому +1

      I’m hoping to get someone on at some point to discuss this!

    • @thomasmyers9128
      @thomasmyers9128 20 годин тому

      @ …. Thanks…,that will be great

  • @Archetype73
    @Archetype73 20 днів тому +11

    There is a Research Institute out of Palermo Sicily. The mans name is Guiseppe Maria Catalano…. Called the International Institute for Advanced Studies of Space Representation Sciences. Phenomenal Research and video on youtube as well… I have seen the fruits up close on the thorn crown, there are very clear chains on the mans wrists. There is a distinct image of a hexagonal shaped Talisman hanging on a cord or chain from the Crown of Thorns. If you use a magnifying glass you can look at the wrists and clearly see he was still in chains ! I emailed the Late Barrie Swartz about the Talisman but my image was not clear enough for Barry to see over the internet. The Shroud is a Real Holy Relic!

    • @TheGraciousGuest
      @TheGraciousGuest  20 днів тому +2

      Interesting! Thanks for sharing - I'll check it out.

    • @giuliakhawaja7929
      @giuliakhawaja7929 20 днів тому +2

      I’ve watched that video several times . Scientific and very well researched and explained for amateurs.

    • @JosCleland
      @JosCleland 18 днів тому +1

      @@TheGraciousGuestvideo on UA-cam, accompanying presentation available on ResearchGate.

    • @derekallen4568
      @derekallen4568 6 днів тому

      Sure it is, and Muhammad split the moon in two.

    • @derekallen4568
      @derekallen4568 6 днів тому

      Sure it is, and Muhammad split the moon in two.

  • @prayermanone
    @prayermanone 11 днів тому

    It is almost certainly a genuine artifact from the lifetime of Jesus Christ. I once saw a ghost of a lady, she was about my height and was floating a few inches above the ground. What was odd was she was transparent like those models of the visible woman and gave off a soft violet glow of light. This in about 1993.

  • @1Clavdivs
    @1Clavdivs 7 днів тому

    He made us listen almost to the end of a one hour video to propose the idea that nuclear fusion occurred to invalidate the carbon dating; however, the cold nuclear fusion and neutron emission is not explainable, it is not consistent with current knowledge. Hence by his own definition it does not satisfy the requirements for a hypothesis. He is saying that the image was made by divine intervention and that this intervention was done to falsely date the shroud to the middle ages. Why?
    If it was divine intervention, does it need a physical explanation?
    If there is a physical explanation that does place the shroud at 33 AD, this would mean it might be an image of Jesus but would not prove it or prove divinity. It would be historically consistent with historical records of Jesus but at the moment the carbon dating is an obstacle. Simple contamination would explain the inconsistent dating without resorting to fantasy. The problem is that in order to carbon date, more of the shroud needs to be destroyed and this has not been allowed.

  • @impossiblevisits
    @impossiblevisits 13 годин тому

    18:44

  • @Orthodoxi
    @Orthodoxi 18 днів тому +1

    👀

  • @RecycledBikes-jj
    @RecycledBikes-jj 19 днів тому +1

    Weird....

  • @rmcnabb
    @rmcnabb 21 годину тому

    It's a medieval forgery. Sorry, it just is.

  • @paulspice4717
    @paulspice4717 2 дні тому

    Interesting but boring. Good for nerds

  • @timkhan3238
    @timkhan3238 3 години тому

    It's FAKE

  • @carldurrell9943
    @carldurrell9943 7 днів тому

    Could the Shroud have been struck by lightning? ⛈️🎞️

  • @kilroy6765
    @kilroy6765 19 днів тому +1

    Here's a brain burner for someone.. Check those old Sumerian stories, I can't recall from memory which 1 but, when the gods would bring some1 back to life, they used a device called "THE BEAM AND PULSER".. It comes up a few times.. Next brain burner, in the companion Bible appendix, see the 1st temple layout. Consider the pillars are similar to atomic crystal structures, and that the high priest wears a breast plate of 12 specific types of crystals with differing structures.. I think the layout of the temple is the blueprint of the device. Can't prove anything sitting here, but what does a laser resonator look like layed out in stones? Seems like it'd need a light source.. Like an ARK light? Perhaps?. Lol.... Have fun with that!

  • @robbannstrom
    @robbannstrom 14 днів тому +2

    The Purest Hogwash.

    • @DDoubleU8001
      @DDoubleU8001 13 днів тому +3

      We'll await your explanation of how the image was formed. The most knowledgeable, intelligent and capable people around have not come close to reproducing it. The shroud was known to exist several hundred years ago in its current form. So hundreds of years ago they knew how to accomplish it but now they can't ??
      So go ahead with your explanation.

    • @Orthodoxi
      @Orthodoxi 12 днів тому

      Indeed?

  • @Necrovantic
    @Necrovantic 9 днів тому

    Didn't they just find out though, that the shroud is fake?

    • @TheGraciousGuest
      @TheGraciousGuest  8 днів тому +5

      Nope. New studies always being conducted, and some evidence that could point either way. But the fact is there has absolutely never been real, conclusive, binding PROOF that it is a medieval forgery. And there is lots of evidence to suggest otherwise.

  • @elbapo7
    @elbapo7 10 днів тому

    There are some flags which tell me this guy is far from unbiased. And also makes assumptions which are questionable.
    Firstly- his language- repeatedly refering to this as 'the body' shows he is thinking in the paradigm of acceptance this is caused by a body. As opposed to object or process.
    Second- he is accepting of the passsion narrative in all gospels. There are different passion narratives, containing disfferent details across the literature. Much biblical scolarship accepts that this is to do with addition of elements to fulfil aspect of prophecy over time. And indeed, if it contains all elements- as opposed to some slightly off - this would point to a forgery to fit the narrative as opposed to the other way around.
    He sees things others don't see- teeth- colours- which back his hypothesis.
    He makes the assertion it could not be made by forgery without examining means by which forgery could have produced the know effect. He 'starts with the evidence' then jumps to a dead mans body radiating.
    As opposed to, say- a cloth used as a shroud placed around on a hot metal object (say brown body radiating statue fresh from forge). Technology easily avaiable to the eastern romans.
    This is just me making up a hypothesis based upon three minutes of thought.
    But its more likely to fit with the known laws of physics and therefore more scientific than anything this guy says.
    He says its veritcally projected- ignoring the fact shrouds were wrapped like a fold flat on top and bottom (even noted on his own website)
    Overall he just sounds like a guy trying to tailor evidence to preset conclusions.
    Im still totally intrigued- but want real analysis which is possibly too mich to ask in relation to the shroud of turin