Uhhh, yeah I'm fully aware of that. I phrased my comment the way I did because, as I said, I was trying to put it in simple terms. And with the subject we are discussing, oxygen is the problem. It is also one of the root words for oxidation.
OK Doug, sure. Just to remind you.... Direct quotes: CoinTalk member: "Does oxygen always have to be part of the mix in order for a coin to tone?" @GDJMSP : "In simple terms, yes" -------------------- While oxidation of copper surfaces is indeed "corrosion" by definition - copper collectors should rest easy because when copper oxidizes it creates a protective barrier on the surface to prevent further oxidation. Thus, brown evenly toned copper is a much safer and much more stable type of copper to collect. I've always said collecting RED copper is a foolish thing long term - eventually all copper will turn brown. The benefit of purchasing a copper coin after it has already oxidized is that you know it will not likely have unsightly, uneven blotchy toning. This instability of copper's red color is the very reason the TPGs stopped guaranteeing the color designations of copper coins. This thread needs more pictures:
OK, answer a question for me. Take a coin, any coin, put in an airtight oxygen free container, ordinary air in other respects just no oxygen in it - is that coin going to tone ? Answer, no it isn't. Because oxygen is required for toning to occur. And no, there's not enough fluorine, chlorine, and or bromine in the air that we breathe to cause toning. And that's what the question was about, and why my answer was yes. For that matter, if coin slabs could be made airtight, coins inside them wouldn't tone either - because there wouldn't be enough oxygen in that tiny bit of air to cause toning.
Let's have more fun. Place your oxygenless air and copper penny in an environment at high pressure and temperature and the copper will react with the nitrogen present (as the largest component of air). I mean, really high pressure and temps, but it would tone...
Fair enough, but the discussion, and the question asked, isn't and wasn't about the extremes and or, how shall I say it - "other possibilities" such as fluorine, chlorine, and or bromine. And there are more beyond those, such as what you suggest. The discussion/question is and was about what the collectors, ordinary people face, and if oxygen plays a key part in coins toning. And the simple answer is, under ordinary circumstances, cut off the oxygen and it pretty much aint gonna happen.
I would reply that under normal circumstances it is unlikely to find 'air' devoid of oxygen, so hitting that state is then less of a jump to further theoretical extrapolation in my mind. I wasn't trying to insult. Perhaps people could store their coins in a vacuum or inert gas?
Actually "air devoid of oxygen" or at least with the oxygen reduced, is not rare at all. I see the advice for people to put a few shiny penn... cents in along with their silver coins to scavenge the oxygen in the air in the container.
You stated unequivocally that it was called oxidation because oxygen was involved. That is false. It’s called oxidation because of electron loss. Yes, under normal circumstances, oxygen is the driver for toning of coins. I never implied that fluorine was a driver. I brought up fluorine (and other elements) to prove my point that it is NOT called oxidation because of oxygen. Fluorine is an oxidizer, and is not oxygen.
Oh, stop. Of course it's called oxidation because of oxygen! Oxygen was discovered by Joseph Priestly and investigated by Antoine Lavoisier in the 1700's. At that time they didn't know an electron from an elephant.
Can you read? Just because something was named something because of ignorance 300 years ago doesn’t mean its definition is the same today. I said oxidation does not imply oxygen. Not the reverse.