( 302 ) 
Hence the circumstance that Dierertici’s formula for 2 gives a 
C 
good representation of the observations proves that his original equa- 
tions do not do so. Hence his equation of state must be left out of 
consideration. 
et : On 9 
§ 5. The existing uncertainty about \—) and C4 | —— 
5 y (=) : & a Den 
; OAN enn 927 
simple substance (when (=) diminishes, probably C4 (oee) must 
OT 0a 0T 
also be diminished) is a great impediment in the application of our 
considerations to mixtures; we may, however, accept that we are not 
far wrong, when with VAN DER WAALS we put (=) = 6.7 and 
(x 
07 
a ane 
*\ 90 a 
§ 6. We will apply the equations (2) and (3) to the observations 
of VERSCHAFFELT. He gives (Communication n°. 47, Proceedings 
Febr. ’'99 and Communication n°. 65, Arch. Néerl. série II t. V p. 
646) for two mixtures of carbon dioxide and hydrogen 7: and pp, 
for three mixtures Ter and psp as he has derived them by superim- 
posing the logarithmic isothermal-systems, and also for carbon 
dioxide 7, and pz as calculated by him from AMAGAT’s isothermals 
To derive from this « = = (= 
ry Sods 
put 7.4 = Ty (1 + ae + a's?) and compute the co-efficients @ and 
a! from the observations for « = 0.0494 and «= 0.0995. Thus we 
find « = —1.219 @=— 1.645. If on the contrary we compute 
a and /? from the formulae accepted by VERSCHAFFELT (Communi- 
cation n°. 65, Arch. Néerl. t. V p. 649) to represent T% and par 
as functions of «: 
) when z is small, we may 
mj) 
