- Gentlemen, start your drones: Judge’s ruling opens door for commercial use
- Soldier who hid, bragged about not saluting flag to be punished — in secret
- ‘Maverick’ of the seas: ‘Top Gun’ school for U.S. ship officers to launch
- Putin declares Sochi Paralympics open amid Ukrainian protest
- ‘In Jesus name, we pray’ sparks ire at Ohio council meeting
- Navy’s first laser weapon ready for prime time; drone killer to deploy this summer
- Billionaire backer: Rick Santorum ‘needs to be heard’ in 2016
- Obamacare fallout: 49 percent pessimistic; 45 percent ‘scared’
- DHS accused of holding U.S. citizen at airport, using emails to pry into her sex life
- Seattle socialist: Minimum-wage discussion skewed by ‘right-wing’ GAO analysis
Taxpayers must pay the freight for over-budget train projects
Topic - Stanley Feldman
Leonardo da Vinci's "Mona Lisa"(1501-1516) is regarded as one of the world's finest masterpieces and greatest mysteries. For centuries, art historians and literary biographers have written volumes discussing every geometrical line, color, angle and shape in this beautiful painting.
A Zurich-based foundation says it will prove to the world Thursday that Leonardo Da Vinci painted an earlier version of the Mona Lisa _ a claim doubted by at least one expert on the multifaceted Renaissance artist.
"So far, not one scientific test has been able to disprove that the painting is by Leonardo," said art historian Stanley Feldman, a foundation member and principal author of a foundation book entitled "Mona Lisa: Leonardo's Earlier Version" to be released Thursday. "We have used methods that were not available to Leonardo 500 years ago."
"When we do a very elementary mathematical test, we have discovered that all of the elements of the two bodies _ the two people, the two sitters _ are in exactly the same place," Feldman told The Associated Press by phone. "It strikes us that in order for that to be so accurate, so meticulously exact, only the person who did one did the other ... It's an extraordinary revelation in itself, and we think it's valid."