Go ahead!
-
-
As an Engineer myself ... I applaude Dietrich for some very thought provoking data and information.
It's one of the first things you learn, even in elementry statistical analysis. You CANNOT test one item and pass the results as a representation of the whole. Only with the testing of MANY specimens and the results compiled can one draw any conclusions of any scientific value or certainty. -
Great post Dietrich and thank you so much for sharing it. Since there's no "Control Cross" available..Testing more than one Cross at the same time would be the only way ,but I'd think that the test Crosses would have to be in almost the same condition ..or as close as poss. Can you imagine if someone was testing a Cross that's been repainted or touched up without realizing it. Even a Cross that was very carefully repainted in the early 60's would today have 40 years of age on it so , it could be hard to spot (unless gloss was used ). Another thing , I remember in the 60's it was common to spray a thin coat of sealer on the medals to preserve the finish ( or so everyone thought) ..I wonder how that would affect the test results if a small amount of the residue was still left on it.Last edited by chef; 11-11-2005, 11:34 PM.Comment
-
I dont know if this is the proper way to talk about this, and I am not a scientist by any stretch of the imagination - I am of the artistic side. However I was talking with my father who has a masters in Nuclear Physics about SEM and IR testing of medals. He offered another way which the military used several years ago to determine the date of certain metals - dont know why the military was doing this or why - dad wouldnt say - however he brought up the topic of using a historical marker to determine the age of metal - it works for all metals. The atomic explosions in Japan and later testing in various sites produced a unique marker for metal for the rest of time. Basicaly the military found that all metals and ore and everythign has recieved a certain ammount of 'fallout' since Aug 1945. It penetrates the ground and while the ore is wiaitng to be processed, etc...the unique characteristic of metal manufactured after 1945 is that this 'radioactivity' is imbedded into the metal. (when you smelt it the radioactive particles get mixed into the molten metal and then are 'stuck' uniformly into the metal itslef. However metal that was manufactured before 1945 has only a 'coating' of the radioactive fallout. This can be removed with ultrasonic cleaning (for best results), or even just a good wash with soap and water! Then the two metals are put into two shielded vacume chambers with a gyger counter (spelling??) the test took several weeks as they counted the 'ticks' of the counter, the one with less 'ticks' was always metal produced before 1945 - the rest were post 1945. Of course I dont know of anyone who could do this test today as this was probably done by the military in the 1970's. So - a Souval makde in the 1960's or a rounder (perhaps) made in the 1970's would by all consideration have 'fallout' mixed into the cores, the silver, etc...where as a verified Junker could be cleaned of all fallout. Just an idea my dad gave me.
RegardsComment
-
Dietrich,
Well this was something interesting to wake up to find! Well done. It just shows that this is indeed an ongoing process. What is important is that we are using a scientific process and not veteran stories or gut feelings. I applaud your work! One day we will find a method to find the truth on this, but until then we have to keep asking these questions. Thanks for this.
Regards,
MarcComment
-
And of course a huge thank you to Allan for the time and money well spent.
Dietrich, my comment in the other thread was not to say the test is 'bad' or 'inconclusive'. Quite the contrary. OF the hundredsof thousands of samples in the database, perhaps millions of samples, none of them was a fingerprint copy to the Rounder. That's taking the entire spectrum or graph of the object, not a point here or there. To match the Rounder to a 1980 Camaro Les Schwab paint job, it has to be an exact match and of the thousands/millions(?) of comparable objects, no match.
The defendant, at this point in time, is, at least, NOT GUILTY.Comment
-
Brian,
my reply was more to myself! I didn't know you were posting and didn't read it till after the fact. But doesn't matter.
I surely do not want to distract form the 'epoxy resin' which I might or might not be, but I also find the presence of Rhodium very interesting, maybe even a bigger hint than everythin else so far.
Consider this:
Three types (plated, etched, plain), some marked "7", now 3 with Rhodium.
If that thing is a fake, I would pay big bucks to meet the faker! He knew more about RK's at the time he did it than everybody else in the hobby, including writers and dealers! Even if the Rounder was faked in the early 70's - this guy was very 'advanced'.
DietrichComment
-
Here are the SEM pictures. First the paint structure.Comment
-
The beading valley under 320x magnification.Comment
-
And the rim section.Comment
-
Just to ground things, what do we know? The paint is not of a type post 1945. That is it. It is a good thing, and another piece of evidence, but we still can not date these like Dietrich has done with his article on S&L die-flaws.
Anyway, a great adventure, time and money well spent. And a heck of a lot of fun for geeks like us. But the truth is still elusive.
MarcComment
-
Great work!
Thanks to all who have contributed to this!
Dietrich, uou said there was rounder marked "800" even it was not 800 silver.
Do anyone have evidence that any other manufacturers had deceived in such a way?
LComment
-
Despite the childish comments of self-appointed and "respected experts" in this field, this was the last piece of the puzzle to remove my doubts about the Rounders.Comment
-
Larry,
no, I do not know of any accepted maker that might have done this. But mind you, if the plating is not worn, you might not see it. It could be (and I'm not saying that it is the case) that some "800" stamped accepted pieces are plated.
A member here alledged, that all Rounders are plated and are stamped "800" to deceive. This is at least clearly wrong with my piece which is prooven to be solid silver. Furthermore, there is a weight difference of approx. 3 gr. between the plated piece and all the other Rounders I have weights from, indicating those to be made of solid silver. The current test with Allan's 3 Rounders confirms this also.
But again, the marking of a silver plated piece with "800" is against the German law which is in force since the late 1900.
DietrichComment
-
Dietrich,
Is this plated piece that 3 gr. lighter than the solid silver ones?
EDIT: and what was the base metal of that plated cross? color?
LLast edited by Larry L; 11-12-2005, 02:44 PM.Comment
Comment