Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;-jeffB, post: 3010770, member: 27832&quot;]This assumes something that I think is still in dispute.</p><p><br /></p><p>In the case you describe, the original owner <i>allows toning to proceed</i> while he owns the coins. They start out toned and lustrous, but the toning progresses to a point where it destroys the luster, and dipping reveals that ruined surface.</p><p><br /></p><p>If he had dipped the coins 10 or 20 years ago, it would have removed the toning, and revealed a still-lustrous surface -- but then <i>what would have happened to that surface in the time since</i>?</p><p><br /></p><p>If dipping a coin not only <i>removed</i> toning, but <i>prevented further toning</i>, this argument holds water. But <b>if the dipped coins are kept in an <i>environment</i> that supports further toning, they&#039;re going to tone again</b>. Eventually, whether that toning adds to &quot;original&quot; toning or builds on a newly-dipped surface, it will consume enough of the coin to destroy the luster.</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;ve heard people say that toning on a coin encourages more toning, and I may even have repeated this myself, but I&#039;m not sure there&#039;s evidence for it. <i>Some</i> toning occurs because some reactive solid or liquid is put on the coin, but the kind we&#039;re talking about happens from gases. Rinsing or dipping the coin doesn&#039;t affect those.</p><p><br /></p><p>So, if you dipped those coins 10 or 20 years ago, <i>then kept them in the right environment</i>, they&#039;d still be lustrous. But if you kept them in the same environment that ruined the undipped coins, they&#039;d still be ruined. Conversely, if you&#039;d kept those <i>un</i>dipped coins <i>in the right environment</i>, they&#039;d still be lustrous as well.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Maybe</b>. I can&#039;t prove it; even if I&#039;d taken a bunch of identically toned coins 20 years ago, dipped half of them, then put dipped and undipped coins into various environments, I&#039;d only have a set of anecdotes. But thinking about it from the chemistry end, I don&#039;t see how <i>removing</i> a layer of silver sulfide makes the newly-exposed layer of pure silver <i>less</i> likely to tone further.</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;m sure Doug, Weimar White, Kurt, and various toning enthusiasts here have different opinions. I&#039;m hoping to learn more from continuing discussions.[/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