Is there a difference between "essentially perfect" and perfect? I mean, were the coins that went undetected not detected because they passed a battery of tests and came out with flying colors, or were they just not detected because they weren't evaluated for every measure of authenticity?
If you haven't noticed, I'm single and miserable and I've got four albums of bitching about it that I would offer as proof.
<< <i>If it's undetectable then how would it be discovered as counterfeit? >>
I couldn't be detected....it's perfect. You might think something is up when BU 1889-CC Morgans become available in roll quanities.
<< <i>Already been done. In fact, we know of some counterfeits only because the counterfieters were caught in the act. Otherwise, the fakes would not be known to us, since the quality was, esentially, perfect >>
Glad they were caught and prosecuted.
<< <i>Is there a difference between "essentially perfect" and perfect? >>
Here we go again same old MS69/MS70 argument.....just kidding. There is a huge difference...a perfect counterfiet coin would pass ALL tests and fool ALL the experts.
<< <i>I guess those 5 1913 Liberty Nickels could be counterfeit as well wiven though they were done inside the mint. >>
I thought the 1913 liberty proof 5c dies were already made up by the goverment? Were the 1913 liberty 5c dies made "after hours" ? >>
From Wikpedia.org 1913 Main article: 1913 Liberty Head Nickel The Indian Head design was introduced in February 1913.
Prior to this, no production of Liberty Head nickels had been ordered, and none appear in the U.S. Mint's official striking records. Despite this, five such coins were struck.
All five were initially in the possession of Samuel Brown, who was a Mint employee at the time, and it is commonly assumed by numismatic historians that
Brown surreptitiously produced the coins and then secreted them out of the Mint . Clandestine strikings of this nature had been very common during the 18th and 19th centuries, but had become less common by 1913.
The coins first came to the attention of the numismatic community in 1920. At one time, all five were owned by Colonel E.H.R. Green. Today, two of the coins reside in museums (one in the Smithsonian Institution, and one in the American Numismatic Association's Money Museum), and the other three are in private collections. The finest known specimen sold for $1,840,000 in a 1996 auction, and later resold for $4,150,000 in 2005 [9]. The "Olsen specimen", famous for having been featured on an episode of Hawaii Five-O, commanded $3,000,000 when it was auctioned in 2003 [10].
From CoinResource.com: “In 1913 the Liberty Head design gave way to the Indian Head/Buffalo type.
No Liberty nickels were made of that date officially,
but some years later collectors were stunned to learn that five 1913 examples had surfaced-all of them apparently made on the sly by someone at the Philadelphia Mint.
Despite their clouded origins, these came to be accepted as legitimate collectibles
and they now rank among the most coveted and valuable of all U.S. coins. In 1996 the Eliasberg Specimen, considered the finest of the five, became the first United States coin to top one million dollars at auction.”
If I only had a dollar for every VAM I have...err...nevermind...I do!!
I've been asking for a definitive statement on the so-called PCGS guaranty of authenticity for years and the silence is resoiunding. Maybe this thread explains why.
Have undetectable counterfeits been made? Almost certainly.
Will they remain undetectable forever? Almost certainly not. A coin that passes all scrutiny and every test we can throw at it, is obviously not designed to pass tests that haven't been invented yet.
18th century forgers thought their fakes were safe - and they were in their lifetime. But we can discover them now, through advanced analytical techniques like x-ray fluorescence, electron microscopy and such.
I can easily imagine in a few hundred years time, Mr Spock waving his tricorder over some of today's rarities and discovering evidence of long-ago fraud. Today's forgers can hardly make their coins "tricorder-proof".
Oh yes, they'll know. Won't do us much good, though, so why worry?
Waste no more time arguing what a good man should be. Be one. Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius, "Meditations"
<< <i>Theoretically (and I stress, theoretically) there are already machines that can take a scan of an object and fabricate that object out of a material. >>
Indeed there are such machines, however, even if they 'printed' out objects in gold of the exact proper alloy, there would still be issues.
A signature aspect of a coin, is the striking process itself. When you smash metal, it gets hard, and takes on a unique look. Luster, especially cartwheel luster, and luster where the obverse fields swim in a pattern vaguely like the reverse design, is a result of the striking process. A counterfit with proper composition that did not also undergo authentic manufacture would not have these characteristics.
<< <i>Theoretically (and I stress, theoretically) there are already machines that can take a scan of an object and fabricate that object out of a material. >>
"In theory, there's no difference between throey and practice; in practice, there is"
Jules Reiver's 1794 counterfeit dollar was detected by Jack Collins, a numismatic researcher who was compiling a census of those.
He kept a photo file and when Jules sent him a photo of his, Jack replied that the coin was already pictured and in a certain collection. That was quite confounding to Jules.
When the other coin came up for auction, Jules purchased it and went thru the DuPont laboratories to ascertain the metal content of both. At that time, he found out that his first coin was a different fineness of silver and a copy of the real coin.
I believe that you can read about it on Heritage's website.
PNG member, numismatic dealer since 1965. Operates a retail store, also has exhibited at over 1000 shows. I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
Comments
-- Adam Duritz, of Counting Crows
My Ebay Auctions
<< <i>If it's undetectable then how would it be discovered as counterfeit? >>
I couldn't be detected....it's perfect. You might think something is up when BU 1889-CC Morgans become available in roll quanities.
<< <i>Already been done. In fact, we know of some counterfeits only because the counterfieters were caught in the act. Otherwise, the fakes would not be known to us, since the quality was, esentially, perfect >>
Glad they were caught and prosecuted.
<< <i>Is there a difference between "essentially perfect" and perfect? >>
Here we go again same old MS69/MS70 argument.....just kidding.
There is a huge difference...a perfect counterfiet coin would pass ALL tests and fool ALL the experts.
<< <i>
<< <i>it took PCGS Years to figure out about the FAKE Micro-O Morgans...... >>
Torino...I wasn't talking about added mint marks or altered coins, but counterfeit from scratch.
I guess those 5 1913 Liberty Nickels could be counterfeit as well even though they were done inside the mint.
I heard someone pair $4M for one recently. Boy did Laura get screwed!!
If I only had a dollar for every VAM I have...err...nevermind...I do!!
My "Fun With 21D" Die State Collection - QX5 Pics Attached
-----
Proud Owner of
2 –DAMMIT BOY!!! ® Awards
<< <i>I guess those 5 1913 Liberty Nickels could be counterfeit as well wiven though they were done inside the mint. >>
I thought the 1913 liberty proof 5c dies were already made up by the goverment? Were the 1913 liberty 5c dies made "after hours" ?
<< <i>Maybe it has already been done. If it's perfect, we wouldn't know, would we? >>
Sure we would...populations for truely rare coins would rise. Example...you are offered a roll of 1796 halves.
<< <i>
<< <i>I guess those 5 1913 Liberty Nickels could be counterfeit as well wiven though they were done inside the mint. >>
I thought the 1913 liberty proof 5c dies were already made up by the goverment? Were the 1913 liberty 5c dies made "after hours" ? >>
From Wikpedia.org
1913
Main article: 1913 Liberty Head Nickel
The Indian Head design was introduced in February 1913.
Prior to this, no production of Liberty Head nickels had been ordered, and none appear in the U.S. Mint's official striking records. Despite this, five such coins were struck.
All five were initially in the possession of Samuel Brown, who was a Mint employee at the time, and it is commonly assumed by numismatic historians that
Brown surreptitiously produced the coins and then secreted them out of the Mint . Clandestine strikings of this nature had been very common during the 18th and 19th centuries, but had become less common by 1913.
The coins first came to the attention of the numismatic community in 1920. At one time, all five were owned by Colonel E.H.R. Green. Today, two of the coins reside in museums (one in the Smithsonian Institution, and one in the American Numismatic Association's Money Museum), and the other three are in private collections. The finest known specimen sold for $1,840,000 in a 1996 auction, and later resold for $4,150,000 in 2005 [9]. The "Olsen specimen", famous for having been featured on an episode of Hawaii Five-O, commanded $3,000,000 when it was auctioned in 2003 [10].
From CoinResource.com:
“In 1913 the Liberty Head design gave way to the Indian Head/Buffalo type.
No Liberty nickels were made of that date officially,
but some years later collectors were stunned to learn that five 1913 examples had surfaced-all of them apparently made on the sly by someone at the Philadelphia Mint.
Despite their clouded origins, these came to be accepted as legitimate collectibles
and they now rank among the most coveted and valuable of all U.S. coins. In 1996 the Eliasberg Specimen, considered the finest of the five, became the first United States coin to top one million dollars at auction.”
If I only had a dollar for every VAM I have...err...nevermind...I do!!
My "Fun With 21D" Die State Collection - QX5 Pics Attached
-----
Proud Owner of
2 –DAMMIT BOY!!! ® Awards
Except for the wrong date of 1913 the 1913 proof liberty nickels would have been the perfect undetectable counterfeits.
<< <i>
<< <i>I'll also mention there is no crime in effecting an upgrade of a coin vs. making either conterfeit coins or slabs.............. >>
See, that's the machine I want to own. Give me something that takes my AU-58 Morgan and turns it ito a MS-70 CAM Proof.
I think CCCS has one of those machines..
Geez, imagine a roll of 1796 halves!!! Getting a bit too excited thinking about that!
<< <i>Look at the Reiver' s 1794 dollar(s). It's only by chance that people found out one was counterfeited from the other.
Can you elaborate on this saga?
I've been asking for a definitive statement on the so-called PCGS guaranty of authenticity for years and the silence is resoiunding. Maybe this thread explains why.
Will they remain undetectable forever? Almost certainly not. A coin that passes all scrutiny and every test we can throw at it, is obviously not designed to pass tests that haven't been invented yet.
18th century forgers thought their fakes were safe - and they were in their lifetime. But we can discover them now, through advanced analytical techniques like x-ray fluorescence, electron microscopy and such.
I can easily imagine in a few hundred years time, Mr Spock waving his tricorder over some of today's rarities and discovering evidence of long-ago fraud. Today's forgers can hardly make their coins "tricorder-proof".
Oh yes, they'll know. Won't do us much good, though, so why worry?
Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius, "Meditations"
Apparently I have been awarded one DPOTD.
<< <i>Theoretically (and I stress, theoretically) there are already machines that can take a scan of an object and fabricate that object out of a material. >>
Indeed there are such machines, however, even if they 'printed' out objects in gold of the exact proper alloy, there would still be issues.
A signature aspect of a coin, is the striking process itself. When you smash metal, it gets hard, and takes on a unique look. Luster, especially cartwheel luster, and luster where the obverse fields swim in a pattern vaguely like the reverse design, is a result of the striking process. A counterfit with proper composition that did not also undergo authentic manufacture would not have these characteristics.
>>>My Collection
and these were made 80 years ago
<< <i>
<< <i>Theoretically (and I stress, theoretically) there are already machines that can take a scan of an object and fabricate that object out of a material. >>
"In theory, there's no difference between throey and practice; in practice, there is"
Yogi Berra
He kept a photo file and when Jules sent him a photo of his, Jack replied that the coin was already pictured and in a certain collection. That was quite confounding to Jules.
When the other coin came up for auction, Jules purchased it and went thru the DuPont laboratories to ascertain the metal content of both. At that time, he found out that his first coin was a different fineness of silver and a copy of the real coin.
I believe that you can read about it on Heritage's website.
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
eBaystore