Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="KurtS, post: 2252989, member: 11786"]If you're calculating differences in expected/reported data, you should use the specific gravity figures, and not the interpolated silver percentages (secondary data at best). In other words, sample nr. 13 is supposed to be 10.36, but the calculated SG is only 9.66. That is 93.4% of mint specs or a 6.6% discrepancy. Just by eyeballing the bars on the silver graph, you can see the discrepancy isn't that much, and possibly within their margin of error--but something we may never know. When you calculate the possible silver weight involved, the discrepancies reported aren't that large. And yes, I do not trust my results outright, which is why I did a large control group. For every coin, the end result is an average of three tests. While I don't consider my tests proof of debasing, the differences between base metal coins and silver coins are rather intriguing--and Gary arrived at similar findings in his report, linked above. Also take note of the XRF analysis of the 1943 quarter, posted above. That said, I'm not satisfied with my own SG tests when there are better ways to analyze the elemental composition, such as by XRF. This is why I'll be focusing on such tests in the future.[/QUOTE]