| Contenu de l'article |
- From PLMossman@aol.com Wed Oct 16 14:07:50 2002
Return-Path: <PLMossman@aol.com>
X-Sender: PLMossman@aol.com
X-Apparently-To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_2_1); 16 Oct 2002 21:07:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 2308 invoked from network); 16 Oct 2002 21:07:50 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216)
by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 16 Oct 2002 21:07:50 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m08.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.163)
by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 16 Oct 2002 21:07:50 -0000
Received: from PLMossman@aol.com
by imo-m08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id r.46.2f914a4d (4222)
for <colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com>; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 17:07:43 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <46.2f914a4d.2adf2f1f@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 17:07:43 EDT
Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] RR40
To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_46.2f914a4d.2adf2f1f_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10582
From: PLMossman@aol.com
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=11479862
X-Yahoo-Profile: pmandr04401
--part1_46.2f914a4d.2adf2f1f_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 10/7/2002 5:00:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
mhodder@theworld.com writes:
> Seems like a lot of work for a small reward, to me, using SG to help
> decide if a copper is a cast or not. How would one distinguish a
> cast from a struck counterfeit if the SG's on each deviated from the
> norm?
>
> Mike H
>
Hi Mike,
Sorry for the extended delay in answering you.
Skip and I did sp. g. measurements on several hundred struck counterfeits and
to my recollection none of their values deviated significantly from the value
of pure copper such that we would diagnose them as fake on that basis alone.
There are so many other diagnostic criteria for these struck coppers, sp. g.
is of tertiary importance. However, for cast copies, many - but certainly not
all of them - fell outside the bell curve. So in our/my hands, sp. g. is
just a help and not a diagnosis for the casts. So enough said. See CNL pp.
1784-85.
Best,
Phil
--part1_46.2f914a4d.2adf2f1f_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Times New Roman" LANG="0">In a message dated 10/7/2002 5:00:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mhodder@theworld.com writes:
<BR></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Seems like a lot of work for a small reward, to me, using SG to help
<BR>decide if a copper is a cast or not. How would one distinguish a
<BR>cast from a struck counterfeit if the SG's on each deviated from the
<BR>norm?
<BR>
<BR>Mike H
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Times New Roman" LANG="0"><B>Hi Mike,
<BR>Sorry for the extended delay in answering you.
<BR>Skip and I did sp. g. measurements on several hundred struck counterfeits and to my recollection none of their values deviated significantly from the value of pure copper such that we would diagnose them as fake on that basis alone. There are so many other diagnostic criteria for these struck coppers, sp. g. is of tertiary importance. However, for cast copies, many - but certainly not all of them - fell outside the bell curve. So in our/my hands, sp. g. is just a help and not a diagnosis for the casts. So enough said. See CNL pp. 1784-85.
<BR>Best,
<BR>Phil</B></FONT></HTML>
--part1_46.2f914a4d.2adf2f1f_boundary--
|
|---|
| URL source |
|
|---|
| Date publiée |
|
|---|
| Volume |
|
|---|
