> Ah, you seem to be assuming that the mass of the crown is known and an equivalent mass of gold can be produced.
The first is effectively true because you can weigh the crown in air, which for goldish-density crownlike objects is so relatively thin that you'll get similar results to doing the comparisons in vacuum.
The second assumption of a reference-sample was explicitly stated earlier in the thread, inside the Wikipedia quote.
> I don't see how the counterfeiter has any influence on diff_air, since the mass is not known beforehand.
The crooked crown-maker already knows (A) how much true-gold mass their customer is expecting them to deliver and (B) they have many opportunities to mass-measure and adjust the profitably-adulterated not-quite-pure-gold object they are creating.
The first is effectively true because you can weigh the crown in air, which for goldish-density crownlike objects is so relatively thin that you'll get similar results to doing the comparisons in vacuum.
The second assumption of a reference-sample was explicitly stated earlier in the thread, inside the Wikipedia quote.
> I don't see how the counterfeiter has any influence on diff_air, since the mass is not known beforehand.
The crooked crown-maker already knows (A) how much true-gold mass their customer is expecting them to deliver and (B) they have many opportunities to mass-measure and adjust the profitably-adulterated not-quite-pure-gold object they are creating.