Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;medoraman, post: 1093172, member: 26302&quot;]Well I disagree with Doug a touch here. I would say the law of large numbers should show that there are as many overweights as underweights, and as such just because a bag of F coins are within tolerances of the low end, the average should not show weight loss. If a bag of newly minted dimes weigh 100 pounds for example, saying the same count of dimes in F condition weighing 99.7 pounds is within tolerance is not really true. Technically its true, but it should have been 100 pounds if there were no weight loss. You cannot assume ALL of the dimes were ALL underweight coming from the mint, so therefor no weight loss has occurred. Tolerances are fine for individual coins, but shouldn&#039;t be in summary if the mint was truly putting in the silver they have said they did in our coinage.</p><p><br /></p><p>Sorry, but my stat classes are just coming back up, and statistically I do not think that argument is valid. The only way to prove it, though, would be to have large bags of dimes, all of certain wear degrees, and weigh them. Even then you would have sampling error, so multiple bags in each grade would be required to PROVE it within a statistically meaningful way.</p><p><br /></p><p>I do not wish to go through this exercise, but if someone does it would be great. From my own experience I know to discount weight on heavily worn coins, (ie do not assume it is counterfeit if under tolerances). If any coin F up is not within tolerances I would immediately suspect a counterfeit.[/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