opening and closing the battery circuit. The first and second 

 experiments agree with those of the morning but the others 

 show a reversal of them. 



Reversing the direction of the bullet over the transformer 

 reversed the deflection of the galvanometer deflection and re- 

 versing the connections of the galvanometer reversed the de- 

 flections. 



TABLE III. 



The non-elimination of the iron introduced a confusing ele- 

 ment into the experiment as did the open and closed core. It 

 was found that the same conditions could not be depended 

 upon to produce the same results; consequently the experiment 

 was continued with the arrangement shown in Fig. 4, and 

 about Ave o'clock the following data were obtained: 



An examination of table II. obtained in the morning shows 

 a reversal of the galvanometer as compared with table I, the 

 data of which were obtained in the afternoon. An examination 

 of table IV shows deflections that agree with those of table I, 

 both tables having been formed in the afternoon. Experiment 

 1. table IV, is in the original position. Experiment 2 shows 

 that reversing the transformer reversed the direction of the 

 galvanometer, and experiment 3 shows that reversing the con- 

 nections on the galvanometer also reversed the deflection of 

 the galvanometer. These results when compared with the action 

 of the battery, show that the bullet was acting as though it 

 were a moving charge of electricity. Since the deflections in 

 the afternoon were the reverse of those of the morning, the 

 charge on the bullet must have been different in the morning 

 to the charge on it in the afternoon. 



64 



