First Page
Posted 03/23/2015 5:09 pm
Since not all of the members here are also members of the other forum where this coin has been discussed (Sedwick's) I feel I have to comment in a similar vein as I did on the other.
The new better pictures actually make the case stronger for a numismatic forgery rather than weaker. After personally examining thousands of counterfeits over the past 30 years - the surfaces of this coin look far more counterfeit than genuine.
However, the clincher is the enlarged picture of the edge which can be matched with a sketch I prepared to illustrate a forged overlap for the Sedwick forum. Here is the picture. Note I have rotated and flipped the picture in an attempt to match the picture with the sketch.
The coin has a clear overlap visible. However, the segments within the left half of the picture are ALIGNED with one another even though they should have been created by two different dies following TWO DIFFERENT alignments. The portion on the right half is less clearly aligned (because of edge damage) but even so most segments are clearly LOWER than the left (at least one set of impressions). That creates an impossible situation which can not be created on a castang machine (two parallel flat bar die edger). It violates geometry and and it is a physical impossibility.
I made a series of sketches to show the problem step by step. The first picture shows a theoretical edge - one that has both edge dies aligned - the center line of each pattern matches. The pink segments were applied to the edge first, at the beginning of the edging process and the segments in blue were added last at the end of the edging process. The elements are all aligned along the center line on BOTH sides of the overlap.
That matching alignment is not quite normal. Most center lines are in reality slightly out of alignment. This next picture shows what the edge overlap looks like when the two edge dies are NOT aligned. If you notice all of the pink segments are aligned along ONE axis and the blue segments are aligned on the second axis.
The geometry of the situation actually precludes any other arrangement. These two alignments are there is. All blue segments should be in alignment as should all pink segments.
Now here is the edge I see in the case of this coin:
Notice that on the left side of a "seam" the pink and blue segments are aligned with each other. On the right side they are also aligned BUT ALONG A DIFFERENT center line.
This is impossible for an edge made on a Castang machine but is very believable on a cast edge which was copied from a genuine coin if the edge mold was SPLICED together unaligned at one end.
I know that other "experts" have viewed the coin and think it is real. I wonder if they evaluated the IMPOSSIBLE edge? An opinion is one thing a scientific theory is different. There is now a need disprove my theory before advancing to a different opinion.
If someone can explain to me HOW this edge could be created using a two die edger I stand to be corrected of course.
The new better pictures actually make the case stronger for a numismatic forgery rather than weaker. After personally examining thousands of counterfeits over the past 30 years - the surfaces of this coin look far more counterfeit than genuine.
However, the clincher is the enlarged picture of the edge which can be matched with a sketch I prepared to illustrate a forged overlap for the Sedwick forum. Here is the picture. Note I have rotated and flipped the picture in an attempt to match the picture with the sketch.
The coin has a clear overlap visible. However, the segments within the left half of the picture are ALIGNED with one another even though they should have been created by two different dies following TWO DIFFERENT alignments. The portion on the right half is less clearly aligned (because of edge damage) but even so most segments are clearly LOWER than the left (at least one set of impressions). That creates an impossible situation which can not be created on a castang machine (two parallel flat bar die edger). It violates geometry and and it is a physical impossibility.
I made a series of sketches to show the problem step by step. The first picture shows a theoretical edge - one that has both edge dies aligned - the center line of each pattern matches. The pink segments were applied to the edge first, at the beginning of the edging process and the segments in blue were added last at the end of the edging process. The elements are all aligned along the center line on BOTH sides of the overlap.
That matching alignment is not quite normal. Most center lines are in reality slightly out of alignment. This next picture shows what the edge overlap looks like when the two edge dies are NOT aligned. If you notice all of the pink segments are aligned along ONE axis and the blue segments are aligned on the second axis.
The geometry of the situation actually precludes any other arrangement. These two alignments are there is. All blue segments should be in alignment as should all pink segments.
Now here is the edge I see in the case of this coin:
Notice that on the left side of a "seam" the pink and blue segments are aligned with each other. On the right side they are also aligned BUT ALONG A DIFFERENT center line.
This is impossible for an edge made on a Castang machine but is very believable on a cast edge which was copied from a genuine coin if the edge mold was SPLICED together unaligned at one end.
I know that other "experts" have viewed the coin and think it is real. I wonder if they evaluated the IMPOSSIBLE edge? An opinion is one thing a scientific theory is different. There is now a need disprove my theory before advancing to a different opinion.
If someone can explain to me HOW this edge could be created using a two die edger I stand to be corrected of course.
