Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Jim was an honorary member of our gold club, the Valley Prospectors of San Bernardino. It was always special when he attended meetings. He loved to share general knowledge and had great stories. A few years ago the club even named a claim after him. I wish I knew him better. His legacy lives through his pioneering books on nugget detecting.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So many successful “old timers” in this have passed away without sharing their hard earned knowledge and understanding.  Jim Straight, along with a few others (relatively) did the opposite by sharing what they know or knew.

He will be remembered amongst our ever growing numbers for he has left a legacy of his published knowledge to help us along in our adventures.

May his sole Rest In Peace, a true legend of our time.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never had the pleasure of meeting Jim. He did correspond with me a few times, and without fail Jim went out of his way with kind commentary. A real gentleman for sure... Rest In Peace.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry to hear that Jim has passed.  My very earliest days of metal detecting were greatly helped by Jim.

I have his books and the ICMJ articles in my library.  I will dedicate my summer searches to Jim's memory.

Bugler

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had some great correspondence with him over the years, and he was a supremely helpful person, and he always made me feel like he'd known me a lifetime, a rare person indeed.

Thanks for the notification, as I was beginning to wonder why he had gone silent on some of his ongoing threads.

All the best,

Lanny

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the name only but have heard & read great things about him, it saddens me to hear of his passing. RIP Jim. ☹️ My condolences to his friends & family.

JW  

PS. It also saddened me to learn that Dan Blankinship, from The Curse Of Oak Island, passed away at the age of 95. Another treasure hunter gone. ☹️  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will be a nice obituary article in the ICMJ this month for Jim. He wrote many articles for us.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎19‎/‎2019 at 12:37 AM, Lunk said:

"Rest in peace my friend"... 

 I remember Jim Straight called Lunk "young man" so long ago, when he first saw Lunk meticulously gridding a known gold area in the northern Nevada desert.  

The first and only time I met Jim Straight, was at a gold show in southern California.  At that time he was carrying his tiny new granddaughter in his arms.  Great memories!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By Glenn in CO
      Is this the largest gold coin minted?
       
      https://stream2.kitco.com/19_07_16_Perth_liferay.mp4
       
    • By mn90403
      Trade that coil in for a dish?
      https://www.rt.com/business/462703-golden-asteroid-everyone-billionaire/amp/
    • By garikfox
      Here's a interesting read. If this asteroid crashed on Earth, it could make everyone a billionaire and collapse the Earth's economy. Crazy!
      https://www.foxnews.com/science/nasa-headed-towards-giant-golden-asteroid-that-could-make-everyone-on-earth-a-billionaire
    • By jrbeatty
      Looks like instability in the Persian Gulf has had one positive outcome with gold topping AU$2000 for the first time.
      Certainly will run higher but may need to consolidate first. Traders taking profits may also push it down:

    • By Mark Gillespie
      Mankind's attitude to gold is bizarre. Chemically, it is uninteresting - it barely reacts with any other element. Yet, of all the 118 elements in the periodic table, gold is the one we humans have always tended to choose to use as currency. Why?
      Why not osmium or chromium, or helium, say - or maybe seaborgium?
      That's where I meet Andrea Sella, a professor of chemistry at University College London, beside an exquisite breastplate of pure beaten gold.
      He pulls out a copy of the periodic table.
      "Some elements are pretty easy to dismiss," he tells me, gesturing to the right-hand side of the table.
      "Here you've got the noble gases and the halogens. A gas is never going to be much good as a currency. It isn't really going to be practical to carry around little phials of gas is it?
      "And then there's the fact that they are colorless. How on earth would you know what it is?"
      The two liquid elements (at everyday temperature and pressure) - mercury and bromine - would be impractical too. Both are also poisonous - not a good quality in something you plan to use as money. Similarly, we can cross out arsenic and several others.
      Sella now turns his attention to the left-hand side of the table.
      "We can rule out most of the elements here as well," he says confidently.
      "The alkaline metals and earths are just too reactive. Many people will remember from school dropping sodium or potassium into a dish of water. It fizzes around and goes pop - an explosive currency just isn't a good idea."
      A similar argument applies to another whole class of elements, the radioactive ones: you don't want your cash to give you cancer.
      Out go thorium, uranium and plutonium, along with a whole bestiary of synthetically-created elements - rutherfordium, seaborgium, ununpentium, and einsteinium - which only ever exist momentarily as part of a lab experiment, before radioactively decomposing.
      Then there's the group called "rare earths", most of which are actually less rare than gold.
      Unfortunately, they are chemically hard to distinguish from each other, so you would never know what you had in your pocket.
      This leaves us with the middle area of the periodic table, the "transition" and "post-transition" metals.
      This group of 49 elements includes some familiar names - iron, aluminum, copper, lead, silver.
      But examine them in detail and you realize almost all have serious drawbacks.
      We've got some very tough and durable elements on the left-hand side - titanium and zirconium, for example.
      The problem is they are very hard to smelt. You need to get your furnace up into the region of 1,000C before you can begin to extract these metals from their ores. That kind of specialist equipment wasn't available to ancient man.
      Aluminum is also hard to extract, and it's just too flimsy for coinage. Most of the others in the group aren't stable - they corrode if exposed to water or oxidize in the air.
      Take iron. In theory it looks quite a good prospect for currency. It is attractive and polishes up to a lovely sheen. The problem is rust: unless you keep it completely dry it is liable to corrode away.
      "A self-debasing currency is clearly not a good idea," says Sella.
      We can rule out lead and copper on the same basis. Both are liable to corrosion. Societies have made both into money but the currencies did not last, literally.
      So, what's left?
      Of the 118 elements we are now down to just eight contenders: platinum, palladium, rhodium, iridium, osmium and ruthenium, along with the old familiars, gold and silver.
      These are known as the noble metals, "noble" because they stand apart, barely reacting with the other elements.
      They are also all pretty rare, another important criterion for a currency.
      Even if iron didn't rust, it wouldn't make a good basis for money because there's just too much of it around. You would end up having to carry some very big coins about.
      With all the noble metals except silver and gold, you have the opposite problem. They are so rare that you would have to cast some very tiny coins, which you might easily lose.
      They are also very hard to extract. The melting point of platinum is 1,768C.
      That leaves just two elements - silver and gold.
      Both are scarce but not impossibly rare. Both also have a relatively low melting point, and are therefore easy to turn into coins, ingots or jewelry.
      Silver tarnishes - it reacts with minute amounts of Sulphur in the air. That's why we place particular value on gold.
      It turns out then, that the reason gold is precious is precisely that it is so chemically uninteresting.
      Gold's relative inertness means you can create an elaborate golden jaguar and be confident that 1,000 years later it can be found in a museum display case in central London, still in pristine condition.
      So what does this process of elemental elimination tell us about what makes a good currency?
      First off, it doesn't have to have any intrinsic value. A currency only has value because we, as a society, decide that it does.
      As we've seen, it also needs to be stable, portable and non-toxic. And it needs to be fairly rare - you might be surprised just how little gold there is in the world.
      If you were to collect together every earring, every gold sovereign, the tiny traces gold in every computer chip, every pre-Columbian statuette, and every wedding ring and melt it down, it's guesstimated that you'd be left with just one 20-metre cube, or thereabouts.
      But scarcity and stability aren't the whole story. Gold has one other quality that makes it the stand-out contender for currency in the periodic table. Gold is... golden.
      All the other metals in the periodic table are silvery-colored except for copper - and as we've already seen, copper corrodes, turning green when exposed to moist air. That makes gold very distinctive.
      "That's the other secret of gold's success as a currency," says Sella. "Gold is unbelievably beautiful."
       
    • By mn90403
      Newmont bought Goldcorp.  Ok.  They are big and we are not so ??
      They have to divest properties.
      https://www.reuters.com/article/us-goldcorp-m-a-newmont-mining/newmont-to-become-largest-gold-producer-with-10-billion-goldcorp-buy-idUSKCN1P80UM
      Mitchel
×
×
  • Create New...