Posted 09/21/2019 11:03 pm
hmmm thats an interesting article by mike diamond and a good read, I'm a little confused by the end though because he seems like he isn't agreeing with Cuvelier saying:
Quote:
For example, he lists a 1982 cent that shows, on both faces, concentric, irregular, closely-spaced hexagonal rings (see photo). He speculates that the die might have been abraded by a rotating brush. But I don't see how a rotating brush could generate polygonal scratches.
For example, he lists a 1982 cent that shows, on both faces, concentric, irregular, closely-spaced hexagonal rings (see photo). He speculates that the die might have been abraded by a rotating brush. But I don't see how a rotating brush could generate polygonal scratches.
Edited by CoinTheTerm
09/21/2019 11:03 pm
09/21/2019 11:03 pm
