( 353 ) 
TABLE VIII. Ticerstept Versuch 38. 
Indirecte Reizung des Muskels; aufstei- 
gende Oeffnungsinductionsschlage. 
Fig. 7. 
A = 9.974127 
= 0.1287685 
C = 48.25489 
R E calc, |Hmeas. Q 
5d 5.7901 5.8 | + 0.0099 
60| 7.7766 | 7.8 | + 0.0234 
65 | 8.8200 | 8.8 | — 0.0200 
70 9.3690 9.4 | + 0.0310 
75 | 9.6358 9.65} — 0.0058 
| 
Eo?= 0.00204021 
Om = 0.03194 
In reviewing the series here communicated, we cannot but remark 
the singularly fine agreement between the calculated lifting-height 
and the measured numbers; an accordance such as is indeed hardly 
ever to be met with in physiology. The errors remain generally 
within limits, not exceeding the errors of observation. Usually 
the measurings are given with an accuracy of 0,1 m.m.; sometimes 
even 0,05 m.m. is noted. We may therefore safely assume that the 
observation error amounts to 0,1 m.m.; the mean error of a single 
observation in each series amounts from 0,1 to 0,15 m.m.; the 
smallest value amounts only to 0,03 m.m. and was found in 
TIGERSTEDT’s series N°. 38. In the other series we find 0,08, 0,10, 
0,11, 0,14, 0,15 and 0,25 m.m., whilst one of WALLER’s series 
offers a larger error, viz. of 0,33 m.m., just like TIGERSTEDT’s series 
N°. 32, where the mean error of each observation even rises to 
0,44 m.m. 
For both errors, that in WALLER’s series and that in table VI, 
a very good reason seems to exist. We will begin with TIGERSTEDT's 
series. 
A closer examination of the curve shows that probably the first 
observation of the series has caused this abnormality. Therefore I 
give for series 281 a new approximation, in which the first value 
