Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 820583, member: 112&quot;]Jim the point I was trying to get across was that the theory, as you describe it, just doesn&#039;t work. What I&#039;d really like to see you do is conduct more tests. But you need a control group to validate the tests.</p><p><br /></p><p>Take 2 groups of coins stored in 2 separate containers. In one container you place one of your sacrificial anodes. After a period of time it is my contention that both groups of coins will have the same amount of toning thus disproving the theory.</p><p><br /></p><p>But your system could and would work if it was devised in a similar manner as Intercept uses. Think of it this way. </p><p><br /></p><p>The coins you are trying to protect are stored in a tube. But at each end of that tube you have one of your sacrificial anodes. That means that any air entering the tube first has to pass by the anode which will cause the contaminants to settle on the anode before they can get to the other coins. Thus effectively protecting the other coins from toning.</p><p><br /></p><p>This is precisely why the Intercept system works. Because in all of their various confiurations any air must first pass by the intercept material before it can reach the coins that are being protected. I have always suspected that THAT is where they got the name even - the intercept material &quot;intercepts&quot; any contaminants before they can get to the coins. </p><p><br /></p><p>The intercept material, and your sacrifical anode, both do the same job - they act as filters. They remove contaminants from the air before that air reaches the coins being protected. But the only way they work is if they surround the coins being protected so that any air infiltration is filtered before it can reach the coins being protected.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in