Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;briac michaux, post: 10553589, member: 143064&quot;]You are not metallurgist, I know it that&#039;s why I provide you example. </p><p><br /></p><p>1 matrix used to make 3 moulds will give 3 times exactly the same mould.</p><p><br /></p><p>to get 3 different moulds, you have 2 possibilities</p><p><br /></p><p>1) use 3 matrix</p><p>2) use 1 matrix but correct/change the shape of moulds</p><p><br /></p><p>What should be the interest in IIIrd century to change shape of moulds? obviously non</p><p><br /></p><p>what should be the interest in XVIIIth century? obvioulsy to mislead collectors and curators who would have noticed the excessive resemblance and would have immediately understood that it was the work of a forger</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;m totally agree with you, separation of Gold ans silver was hard in IIIrd century, that&#039;s exactly why your results give evidences of the modern forgery. it was impossible to separate gold and silver leaving copper.</p><p>either we withdrew everything, or we withdrew the copper but we could not leave the copper while withdrawing the silver. </p><p><br /></p><p>the postulate &quot;A bit of copper could have been added at any time.&quot; is just a way to keep your head out of water but if it&#039;s the case, the guy who made those tokens was just trying to deceive people... it&#039;s typicaly what should do a faker...</p><p><br /></p><p>in all points you only have ideological answers, you don&#039;t have any evidences of the genuiness ot those tokens and now that you have analyzed gold to try and confirm your theory, you say you need someone with knowledge of gold metallurgy... but then why did you publish?[/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