radiometric dating of coins?

Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by Herberto, Aug 29, 2015.

  1. Herberto

    Herberto Well-Known Member

    Radiocarbon-dating does have an inaccuracy of plus-minus 75 years or 200 years depending the materials you are testing.

    An accuracy of plus-minus 200 years would be fantastic in term of dating ancient numismatic coins. However a radiocarbon-dating will not work on coins as coins are not organic unlike papyrus for instance.

    But how about a radiometric dating, would it work on coins?

    I am asking because I did not find answers from google and nor does the topic seem to have been debated here.
     
    Endeavor likes this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. desertgem

    desertgem Senior Errer Collecktor

    Most of the radioisotopes of coin metals do not seem to fall in the range of 10 years to 20,000 years, most being much shorter or much longer. If one knew the original composition of the radioisotope mixture of the original ore when minting, it should be within the resolution of today's instruments to date it, but how do you know what it was then, as that source ( even if known) would continue to decay also. In radiocarbon dating the death of the carbonaceous source sets the beginning point as no more can be accumulated. Check for PhD theses in radiochemistry or associated geology. Let us know what you find.
     
  4. thetracer

    thetracer Active Member

    Most of the radiometric dating methods are used on naturally occurring materials, like rocks and bones, etc.

    Coins been made my humans who have processed, separated, purified certain parts of said rocks; then annealed and smashed them. By the time they are a coin, they are not natural at all.

    Therefore, those dating methods cannot work on those modified materials.

    One would have to invent a method that would be appropriate and accurate for the finished material in the coins; which varies widely over the years and globe.

    I don't think we have that yet, but, if we do, please let me know, thanks
     
    Pellinore likes this.
  5. desertgem

    desertgem Senior Errer Collecktor

    Since no effort has yet been made to separate the isotopes of coin metals before minting coin ( consider the problems of just separating Uranium isotopes for nuclear armaments) no one would bother due to the expense. Any physical alteration of the metal does not change the isotopes composition, so a coin would have the same isotope composition as the original mine deposit, however different mine deposits ( copper from Arizona or Africa) could have different trace mineral isotopes. Here is an article about tracing origins of emeralds. This applies to many other stones, and is important when there are legal aspects to import or sell due to political situations. It is an interesting thought, but I think one would be better to study classical dating ( anthropological -geological formations) than hope for this.

    Now the forum is probably on NSA list for discussing separating Uranium isotopes. North Korea will say they are studying coin dating :) Sorry Peter.
     
  6. thetracer

    thetracer Active Member

    Yes, I really think it is neat that we can trace where minerals and other rocky sediments have come from, their origin. This has been very useful in archaeological studies of where the different types of flint and obsidian have come from and how far they have traveled, via human power.

    Of course, coins have mostly been moved by human power, unless they got lost in some body of water.
     
  7. physics-fan3.14

    physics-fan3.14 You got any more of them.... prooflikes?

    I think other traditional archaeological methods are probably more useful for dating coins.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page