The Shroud of Turin – Miracle or Man made?

Again, people get hung up in the tiny details, and fail to see the bigger picture. If you lay a cloth on a person, there's essentially no way to avoid all kinds of distortion, smudging, and stray wrinkles that mess up the image. This doesn't have any of them.

So what we're looking at here is perhaps a cover for a bas-relief icon that may have been destroyed by now. It gained its coloration by the same kind of slow, electrostatic process that happens when you hang a mirror or painting on a wall and the wall gains a "shadow." Later, somebody added some speckles of blood to make it look more realistic, although if you think about it, why would Jesus still be bleeding in nice little gravity-influenced rivulets when you entomb him?

And finally, the Gospels (if you believe them) clearly state that the appearance of Jesus changed upon his resurrection so much that the Apostles didn't even recognize him. So which Jesus was this? The one before the resurrection, or after? Because they didn't look at all the same.

So many people desperate to believe. It's kind of sad, really.

Originally posted by Rising Against

Originally posted by metalholic
reply to post by Rising Against

 

just to make things clear jesus looked like a muslim black hair black bead dark eyes and dark skin! if you passed him at an airport you would prolly think he was a terrorist depending on your paranoia!

if he was a white man that opens the door for my theories but thats another story!

2 points.

1.) No I wouldn't think he was a terrorist.

That's a pertty stupid thing to say to be honest.

2.)

Well this is what he apparently looks like.

(I'm not saying this is what he would have looked like, but this is what some scientists think according to the shroud

)

[edit on 19-7-2010 by Rising Against]

i did say according to your paranoia...you might have missed that! there was aman named jesus yes...but he wasnt caucasian!

Gday,

Originally posted by Rising Against
Ok, you haven’t replied to my request of backing up your claims so I’ll assume you never saw my post so I’ll reply to what you previously said to another member anyway.

YOU claimed they took the sample from a patch.
It's up to YOU to show evidence.

Originally posted by Rising Against
It seems that here you are wrong I’m afraid.
First off, here is what was took from the Shroud and where It went.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9fcf76b7f9b1.jpg[/atsimg]

So?
That picture shows no patch.

Originally posted by Rising Against
This area was chemically different to the rest of the shroud it seems as shown in this image below.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/86ddd67f02cc.jpg[/atsimg]

Cheimically different?
What?
What is that picture of?
It proves nothing.
Why on earth do YOU think it does?

The facts are clear :
the Shroud is a medieval fake.

But believers still try ANYTHING to disbelieve that fact.

This nonsense about a patch is just one of the stupid and false claims that believers make.

But there is NO actual evidence that a separate patch was sampled.
Certainly the pictures posted by Rising Against are no evidence of that.

The ONLY people who believe this crap about a patch are faithful believers.

Meanwhile - actual scientists and scholars agree the Shroud is a recent fake.


Kap

reply to post by Kapyong

YOU claimed they took the sample from a patch.
It's up to YOU to show evidence.

And it’s up to you to debunk it which you haven’t done as again all you can say is ‘no you’re wrong’ and not be able to back it up in the slightest so why should believe you?

So?
That picture shows no patch.

Err as I explained before, that picture show which part of the shroud went where.

That’s why parts are labelled Arizona#1 or Oxford for example.

I already explained this.

Cheimically different?
What?
What is that picture of?
It proves nothing.
Why on earth do YOU think it does?

Hmm this is interesting because you have clearly and completely ignored what’s written directly UNDER the images I provided.

That’s actual quite startling that you would completely disregard such obvious information like that.

Out of curiosity why have you completely ignored this, it makes no sense to me? You seem to be hinting at that believes don’t have a mind for themselves and believe no matter what but you are actually doing the exact same ting but this time with 'non believing'.

Here's the post again.

It's all explained UNDER the images.

The facts are clear :
the Shroud is a medieval fake.

Prove it.

But believers still try ANYTHING to disbelieve that fact.

Who says I’m a believer anymore? It’s just the way you are trying to debunk this is quite ridiculous in all honesty as you are claiming it’s fake in every post but not once have you backed up this claim.

That’s why I’m rejecting and or challenging your posts as such.

Meanwhile - actual scientists and scholars agree the Shroud is a recent fake.

Wrong. Not every single scientists or scholar that has studied the shroud believes it to be a fake and that is a ridiculously wild claim that is backed up by nothing!


I appreciate that you have a different opinion and that's great because if we all had the same then this would be a boring world indeed, but can you at least try and back up your claims otherwise I'm as well as others I would hope are just not going to believe a word of it.



[edit on 20-7-2010 by Rising Against]

Originally posted by Blue Shift
Again, people get hung up in the tiny details, and fail to see the bigger picture. If you lay a cloth on a person, there's essentially no way to avoid all kinds of distortion, smudging, and stray wrinkles that mess up the image. This doesn't have any of them.

That would also apply to the bas-relief icon you propose had this sheet draped over it for a long time. You are therefore being inconsistent.

Originally posted by Blue Shift
So what we're looking at here is perhaps a cover for a bas-relief icon that may have been destroyed by now. It gained its coloration by the same kind of slow, electrostatic process that happens when you hang a mirror or painting on a wall and the wall gains a "shadow."

Your analogy doesn't work. A shadow is created by an object preventing the settling of dust. Dust settling to a variable degree on a cloth draped over a bas relief would not create a negative of the human body. Nor would it create such an accurate reproduction of a face because image distortion would be introduced as a fabric draped over a three-dimensional
sculpture was removed and flattened to two dimensions.

Originally posted by Blue Shift
Later, somebody added some speckles of blood to make it look more realistic, although if you think about it, why would Jesus still be bleeding in nice little gravity-influenced rivulets when you entomb him?

Well, to play the Devils' Advocate, he might not have been dead when he was lowered from the cross! He might have been in a coma and mistakenly regarded as dead.

Originally posted by Blue Shift
And finally, the Gospels (if you believe them) clearly state that the appearance of Jesus changed upon his resurrection so much that the Apostles didn't even recognize him. So which Jesus was this? The one before the resurrection, or after? Because they didn't look at all the same.

Christians would assert that the image refers to the pre-resurrected Jesus. Why are you making this into an issue that throws doubt on the claim that the Turin Shroud is the burial cloth of Jesus? I don't believe it is, either, but raising this point is irrelevant to the issue of whether it is genuine or an artifact.

Originally posted by Blue Shift
So many people desperate to believe. It's kind of sad, really.

And it's sad that debunkers are so desperate to disbelieve when a more balanced perspective would be to want to know the truth, whatever it turns out to be, instead of letting dogma and prejudice get in the way of clear, impartial thinking.

ww, Rising Against!

what a lot of work you put into this thread! well done, i must say.
i've been fascinated with this topic for some time, myself. it is so mysterious and my interest isn't so much about religion but just about impossibilities and things beyond our current reach of comprehension.

i made a thread a while back, not at all close to the depth you've given the subject, but there is a video that i linked to, that gives answers for some of the questions asked here.

The Fabric of Time

reply to post by queenannie38


To be perfectly honest I really don't have the time right now to watch those videos, but thank you so much for posting them still and reading through other peoples comments I'm sure it's a great piece of information and I appreciate you taking the time to post.

And when time allows I’ll definitely watch the videos as well.

Gday,

Originally posted by Rising Against
And it’s up to you to debunk it which you haven’t done as again all you can say is ‘no you’re wrong’ and not be able to back it up in the slightest so why should believe you?

Hahahaha!
What a laugh!
Scientists HAVE debunked the shroud - the evidence is clear and conclusive.

It's up to YOU to debunk faeries.
Can you? No?
So therefore faeries are real, according to you.

It's up to YOU to debunk leprechauns.
Can you? No?.
So therefore leprechauns are real, according to you.

So?
That picture shows no patch.

Originally posted by Rising Against
Err as I explained before, that picture show which part of the shroud went where.

But YOU presented that picture as evidence of a PATCH which lead the dating astray. You FAILED to show any patch.

Your argument failed completely.

Originally posted by Rising Against
Hmm this is interesting because you have clearly and completely ignored what’s written directly UNDER the images I provided.

But there is no evidence that picture shows a patch on the Shroud.
You have shown NO evidence of a patch.
Just CLAIMS.

Originally posted by Rising Against
That’s actual quite startling that you would completely disregard such obvious information like that.

It is not at all startling that YOU ignore the clear and present evidence it's fake.

Because you're a faithful believer.
The facts don't count.


Kap



[edit on 20-7-2010 by Kapyong]

Gday,

Originally posted by Rising Against
This area was chemically different to the rest of the shroud it seems as shown in this image below.

What?
You show ONE image!
How can ONE image show difference between TWO items?

What is that image of?
WHERE is the comparison?
WHO did the comparison?
WHAT two items did they compare?
Hmmm?

You FAILED to give any such information.


And notably -
The previous image, where the samples came from, show NO SIGN of a patch!

No-one who had anything to do with the samplng noticed a patch.
There is NO EVIDENCE of a patch.

So why are you pretending there was a patch?


Kap

Originally posted by Blue Shift
Again, people get hung up in the tiny details, and fail to see the bigger picture. If you lay a cloth on a person, there's essentially no way to avoid all kinds of distortion, smudging, and stray wrinkles that mess up the image. This doesn't have any of them.

That would also apply to the bas-relief icon you propose had this sheet draped over it for a long time. You are therefore being inconsistent.

Not necessarily. In fact, one of the prerequisites to having an undistorted image form the way it did on the Shroud is that the cloth either has to be flat above and below, or more likely, that it was hanging vertically in front and in back of an icon.

Originally posted by Blue Shift
So what we're looking at here is perhaps a cover for a bas-relief icon that may have been destroyed by now. It gained its coloration by the same kind of slow, electrostatic process that happens when you hang a mirror or painting on a wall and the wall gains a "shadow."

Your analogy doesn't work. A shadow is created by an object preventing the settling of dust. Dust settling to a variable degree on a cloth draped over a bas relief would not create a negative of the human body. Nor would it create such an accurate reproduction of a face because image distortion would be introduced as a fabric draped over a three-dimensional sculpture was removed and flattened to two dimensions.

You understand, don't you, that a bas-relief is not completely three-dimensional, like a statute? It's only partially carved, kind of like a coin. If the fabric, hanging vertically and straight, was kept on the carving for a relatively long period of time, tiny amounts of dust would accumulate on it, just like is shown on the cloth. And it wouldn't be "settling." It would slowly be accumulating. Go take a framed picture off your wall, if you have one. See how it accumulates bits of grime where it touches the wall? That's a result of an electrostatic charge. It's very small, but over a long period of time, it would be consistent, and produce the same kind of blackened image found on the shroud.

I admit it would be an odd bas-relief that was covered up. Kind of like a large, life-sized block of stone with a front view of Jesus on one side and a reverse view on the other. Like he was trapped in carbonite like Han Solo. But that's one of the few ways you could get the proper, non-distorted image.

Check this out: SHROUD OF TURIN DUPLICATION ATTEMPT

Originally posted by Blue Shift
Later, somebody added some speckles of blood to make it look more realistic, although if you think about it, why would Jesus still be bleeding in nice little gravity-influenced rivulets when you entomb him?

Well, to play the Devils' Advocate, he might not have been dead when he was lowered from the cross! He might have been in a coma and mistakenly regarded as dead.

Oh, a heretic, are we? Tsk tsk! So you doubt that Jesus Christ, Son of God, died on the cross for your sins and rose from the dead three days later? Not too long ago, that kind of talk would get you burned at the stake.

reply to post by Rising Against


i totally understand - i often miss out on a lot of threads because i don't have the time to watch the video posted in the OP.

if i get the chance, i'll see if i can find the parts of the videos that answer some of the questions in this thread and post the information for you all.

i've got some different sources that have already written down some of the important points for which i was going to review the video and transcribe, so i'll post some links and excerpts and then, if anything i wanted to share is not included, i'll find the info in the video to post, also.

first of all, from a blog written by someone who has also seen the movie, "The Fabric of Time" - this is in relation to the issue of perspective:

Dame Isabel Piczek, a particle physicist and artist, believes the Shroud has brought science to a whole new understanding of physics. When dealing with the position of the body she discovered one of those mysterious properties that cannot be - yet somehow is: an interface that divides the image transport into 2 hermetically separate, yet simultaneous, actions and forces causing the Shroud to be taut and parallel on both sides, creating a true event horizon.

In general relativity there are certain things we call black holes. The surface of a black hole is called an event horizon, because right at that surface the laws of physics seem to change character drastically. Piczek says, "When you look at the image of the Shroud - the 2 images [front and back] next to each other, you feel that it is a flat image. But .... there is a strange dividing element...from which the body image is projected up, and the image is projected down. The muscles of the body are absolutely not crushed against the stone of the tomb. It means that the body is hovering between the two sides [top and bottom] of the Shroud."

She continues: "What does that mean? That there is absolutely no gravity. Other strange things you discover - the image is absolutely undistorted. Now if you imagine the cloth was tied, wrinkled, wrapped around the body, and all of a sudden you see a perfect image - which is impossible....Everybody thinks that the tomb signifies death. Not at all ... the exact opposite. The Shroud and the tomb signifies an unbelievable beginning, because in the depth of the collapsed event horizon there is something which science knows as 'singularity.' This is exactly what started the universe. We have nothing less in the tomb of Christ than the beginning of a new universe." This is resurrection in its truest sense. This is the starting base for the new physics.

so, the body of the man whose image is on the shroud was levitating when the image was created - that's the only explanation these scientists could come up with.

furthermore, the image itself is a quantum hologram:

In 1997 NASA analyzed a 2-dimensional photo of a 2-dimensional artifact, the Shroud of Turin. From 'somewhere' there emerged 3-dimensional information - something impossible, according to quantum physicists.

(...)

The reason it's important now is because of the unprecedented implications of its authenticity for quantum mechanics. The experts are saying that what happened in that tomb represents an 'event horizon' - the singularity (intelligence explosion) that Einstein and others have endlessly searched for. It turns science upside down. In the simplest of terms, an event horizon is a boundary beyond which events are unobservable.

Unlike anything ever seen before, the image of the body lies on the top layer of the linen threads; it is not absorbed into the fibers. This means that the universe does not work in the way we have always thought. A scientific level of authenticity of the Shroud now exists beyond question. But it raises many new questions. Does the image itself contain information? Why has this just now been discovered - or withheld from mankind - for 2,000 years? Do answers lie, not in the fabric, but within the image itself?

It is the nature of the image (not the fact that there is an image) which is so profound. The fibers are 1/10 the size of human hair. The image elements are randomly distributed like dots in a news or magazine photo. To do this you would need an incredibly accurate atomic laser; this technology does not exist.

An early indicator that the Shroud might have highly significant implications was when the first pictures were taken of it. What would normally show up as a positive image came out as a negative - and vice versa. This does not happen when you develop film. Since the positive and negatives were reversed, this was what made the picture show up in such great detail.

former astronaut Edgar Mitchell, physicist and founder of the Institute of Noetic Sciences, was involved with this documentary and the findings of NASA:

A group of physicists recently made a startling discovery. Edgar Mitchell, Apollo 4 astronaut, said: "Scientists have generally concentrated on the particle aspect, not the information aspect of science. It's only been with the hologram that we've moved information up to a par of importance with energy itself, so that we know the universe exists because of its physicality, but understood because of its information. This is a powerful new concept. All physical bodies have such a holographic emission that is available non-locally at all times, meaning throughout the universe."

He is saying that the event horizon from the Shroud image sent information instantaneously throughout the universe! Does this mean that the Resurrection was a universal event? I think so! On a par with creation.

Some scientists believe the characteristics of the Shroud image, such as 3-dimensional information from a 2-dimensional photo; the negative reversal aspect of the image; and the fact that the image is virtually free of distortion as it appears on the cloth, are basically holographic. Mitchell: "The quantum hologram is merely a method of describing the total emissions from an object, very much like looking at your fingertip. One of the little swirls doesn't tell you very much, but if you look at the swirls on all ten, all at once, that's your 'fingerprint.' It uniquely defines you, identifies you. It's the same with a quantum hologram. The emissions from a physical object, when studied as a whole, uniquely identifies events and history of that object."

here's a link to another blog entry, on another blog, talking about the same movie and findings presented therein.

Originally posted by Kapyong
So why are you pretending there was a patch?

nobody's "pretending"
there are patches, from the middle ages, applied to repair the damage from a fire.

Originally posted by KapyongWhere is the comparison?

here

The conclusion is that what was tested was a cutting taken from a medieval repair, a patch of newer material applied to a well worn corner of the Shroud. The patched-in material was colored with alizarin dye extracted from Madder plant roots.

Sensitive microchemical tests (phloroglucinol in concentrated hydrochloric acid) test positive for vanillin (C8H8O3 or 4-hydroxy-3-methoxybenzaldehyde) in the area of the cloth from which the carbon 14 sample were cut, and only in that area. Vanillin (vanilla) diminishes with time. By calculating the loss of vanillin from the lignin nodes of the cellulose fibers (E = 29.6 kcal/mole and Z = 3.7 X 10exp11/second) one can determine that the cloth is at least twice as old the earliest carbon 14 calculated age. (See Ray Rogers comments below).

Originally posted by KapyongWHO did the comparison?

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 on March 8, 2005 shortly after his article was published in Thermochimica Acta.

source

Originally posted by KapyongWHAT two items did they compare?

these patches:


and the main body of the shroud.

source

Originally posted by metalholic
reply to post by Rising Against

 

just to make things clear jesus looked like a muslim black hair black bead dark eyes and dark skin! if you passed him at an airport you would prolly think he was a terrorist depending on your paranoia!

if he was a white man that opens the door for my theories but thats another story!

Just to be clear there are Muslims of every race. There are not physical features of Muslims. It is a religion just like Christianity. Do you know what a Christian looks like?

here is another good page that addresses the phenomenon of getting 3-D results from a 2-D image.

referring to a computer bitmap image, the page says:

With special computer software we can plot the data, the brighter and darker tones, as an elevation. That is exactly what we can do with the image on the Shroud of Turin: plot it as an elevation.

Let's be clear: You can not plot a regular photograph this way. Nor can you do so for a painting, even a brown and white painting. You can do so with a precise copy of the Shroud, however.

it has so far been impossible to do such a thing, with our technology, but it was done with the Shroud, possibly 2000 years ago! even if it just happened 500 years ago, what exactly happened to have this kind of unprecedented effect?

that's what gets me.

reply to post by queenannie38


A bump map in no way reflects the behavior of a cloth. The bump map takes light and dark to decide an elevation and only an elevation. It does not take into account the effect of a cloth resting on that 3D image and the wrapping that occurs. There is a huge difference between a bump map derived from the shroud image and what you would see if you wrapped someone in a sheet.

reply to post by evil incarnate


you didn't read the information carefully enough to understand what is being said.

nothing acts the same as this cloth, in this regard.

First off relax a lil’

I doubt many people will take hat you are saying too seriously if you’re screaming it down their throats.

Let me address your post and I’ll point you to where I already provided all the information that you’re asking for.
….Some of that information has been posted to you in previous posts directed to you might I add.

Hahahaha! What a laugh! Scientists HAVE debunked the shroud - the evidence is clear and conclusive.

Ok, that's a fair statement but all I ask (and I've asked in previous posts to you where you have failed to provide this) where is the information showing the shroud has been 100% debunked.

Unless you provide this I do not believe a word you say on the matter as I've shown evidence of the complete opposite.

Thank you.

It's up to YOU to debunk faeries.

Can you? No?

So therefore faeries are real, according to you.

It's up to YOU to debunk leprechauns.

Can you? No?.

So therefore leprechauns are real, according to you.

Errmmmmmmmmmmmmm I'm not quite sure where this has come from but errr No I don’t believe in Faeries and leprechauns.

At least there is evidence for the shroud like Im have shown in pervious posts to you and my opening posts.

I still don’t see why you have ignored these.

Bias perhaps?

But YOU presented that picture as evidence of a PATCH which lead the dating astray. You FAILED to show any patch.

Your argument failed completely.

Please read my previous posts DIRECTED AT YOU and you will say which parts of the shroud went where. I've explained and shown this many many many times but for some reason you completely refuse to see it and that is completely baffling.

Again you see to be heavily biased in your opinion here and so much so you refuse to see the evidence.

But there is no evidence that picture shows a patch on the Shroud. You have shown NO evidence of a patch. Just CLAIMS.

Huh? Those images are microscopic views of the actual patch itself!

And also I'm afraid that those pictures are scientific evidence that those samples were repaired in medieval times using medieval methods thus proving the carbon dating was a mistake and the carbon dating proves noting.

Not my words but instead scientific facts.

It's scientific evidence showing this and you can choose to ignore it once again if you wish although I don’t see how anyone can do this like you have in all honesty.

It is not at all startling that YOU ignore the clear and present evidence it's fake. Because you're a faithful believer. The facts don't count.

What evidence showing it's a fake??

You have provided NO evidence showing this, but instead you have provided your own words on the matter.

Show me the evidence and you might actually change my mind.

And why are you brining faith into this? I see no reason for it and my friend I'm not even a 100% believer in this anymore but your arguments are proving nothing to change my mind still.

Again I ask.....Show the evidence!

[edit on 21-7-2010 by Rising Against]

Originally posted by queenannie38
reply to post by evil incarnate

 

you didn't read the information carefully enough to understand what is being said.

nothing acts the same as this cloth, in this regard.

Please show me what I missed then. I see them describing a simple bump map derived from light and dark information in the image. Not only will this not result in a real 3d representation of anything, if it does then it is proof the image did not come from a real 3D human body. Please show me what I missed.

[edit on 7/21/10 by evil incarnate]

Originally posted by evil incarnate
Please show me what I missed then. I see them describing a simple bump map derived from light and dark information in the image. Not only will this not result in a real 3d representation of anything, if it does then it is proof the image did not come from a real 3D human body. Please show me what I missed.

i'm sorry for not being more clear. having seen and read a lot of information on this already, i should have realized i was assuming you would understand but from the small quote i supplied, that wasn't possible.


i found some more information - if i could explain it in my own words, i would, but i can't do it justice.

The fact that the image on the shroud's image is enhanced by various optical techniques such as VP-8 analyses and 3-D software reveal aspects of the Shroud that could not be seen by the human eye, supports the theory that the image was created by some type of biological holographic radiation. At the very least because there are aspects previously unknown and unable to be seen that are historically accurate to the first century, it tells us that the Shroud could not have been "made."

The Shroud's image can not be explained by some mechanism of bodily contact, as that would have yielded a distorted image (much wider appearing). I have always thought that the only plausible explanation is one of a form of radiation emanating in a directional manner. If the body just emanated radiation then we would again have a distorted image. No, the radiation had to have some direction (upward) in order to create the image that is present. This concept of holographic biophysical radiation would explain how a non-distorted image could have been imprinted onto the shroud.

source

the paper that the above article links to was written by Sue Benford, who was one of the two person team that also discovered the reason for the faulty sampling in the carbon-14 dating tests in the 80's.

it is rather lengthy but here, i hope, is some pertinent information:

The VP-8 Image Analyzer is an analog device while the commercially-available Bryce4® Software is digital. Both techniques convert image density (lights and darks) into vertical relief (shadows and highlights). When using either the VP-8 or 3-D software systems, a normal photograph does not result in a three-dimensional image but in a rather distorted jumble of "shapes." X-ray images, although spatially superior to routine photographs, are also characteristically distorted (see Photograph 3B below).

in the case of the shroud, in good quality hi-res photographs, the image does become a 3-D image, not a jumble of shapes.

here's a little bit about the mechanism of operation in holographic imaging:

To better understand the operation, one must first ask: what is the relationship between the test object and the subject? Second, how does the test object carry and transfer complete information of the subject? Third, how is this information optically obtained by the DelaWarr system? One theory is that the test object contains a complete quantum hologram that can affect optical systems and, under the right conditions, produce a holographic-like image. To make a hologram, two optical waves are needed: a reference wave and an object wave. These two waves make a 3-D holographic image by creating an interference pattern frozen in space-time. Both waves are spatially and temporally coherent at the moment of creation, then separated. The object wave is directed towards the object and it experiences intensity changes and phase-shifts. Normal 2-D photographs record only the intensity changes of the object wave and not the phase-shifts. However, when a reference wave is directed back towards the emitted object wave, an interference pattern is created that records the phase-shifts of the object wave relative to the reference wave. These phase-shifts are what produce the apparent freezing in space-time of the object’s 3-D image. “In the absence of space/time (electromagnetic) signals to establish the phase-conjugate-adaptive-resonance (pcar) condition and to provide a basis for decoding the quantum hologram, an icon representing an object seems to be sufficient to allow the brain to focus on the object and to establish the pcar condition. However, a reference signal is also required to provide decoding of the encoded holographic phase dependent information. Marcer (1998) has established, using Huygen's principle of waves and secondary sources, that any waves reverberating through the universe remain coherent with the waves at the source, and are thus sufficient to serve as the reference to decode the holographic information of any quantum hologram emanating from remote locations.”

[edit on 7/21/2010 by queenannie38]