G. Hinrichs on Spectral Lines, 367 
Bromine gives the intervals (§ 6) 
or again the dimension 8. 
Chlorine has the intervals (§ 5) 
9=3X3 
and 5—-3xX2—1 
which, as 5 is probably not complete as far as it goes, again pro- 
nounces the dimen 3. 
we seein the specira of the chlorine group a full and accu- 
rate representation of the atomic dimensions of these elements as ex- 
pressed tn their formula A=n.3*+1, where n=4, 9,14. I re- 
gret that I have no measurements for the fluorine spectrum 
$31. Conclusion.—In the preceding we have found, by means 
of the most accurate determinations of Ditscheiner and Pliicker, 
that for the thirteen elements considered (viz., hydrogen, oxy- 
gen, nitrogen, chlorine, bromine, iodine, mercury, sodium, mag- 
esium, calcium, stro ntium, barium, iron, and besides four com- 
botndsy - the dark lines of the elements are equidistant throughout 
the spectrum, but of varying intensity, many not being observed (or 
observable) at all; the oe between the observable lines are ex- 
Pressible as simple multiples of the ssid distance indicated by all. 
It may be that the lines are a little farther apart in the more re- 
fracted bie part of the spectrum ; see 
¢ have, further, py considering the spectra of ney elements, 
Viz., magnesium, calcium, strontium, barium and chlorine, bro- 
mine, iodine, found that the dark lines of the denis are related to 
the atomic dimensions, considering the elements composed of one single 
primary element, “Orsto 
Thus we found the four alkaline-earth metals, having the 
‘Same base, 2?, to give almost identically the Poni principal dis- 
tance of the lines; the mean was 0mm in wave-length. 
Also in the chlorine ce, most fomaskabls confirmations of 
this law were di iscove 
pothesis of one primary matter as the a. of elements, not 
O 
with no favor: nevertheless we have engined to develop aes 
Consequences of this hypothesis 
ms as if spectra Menlyeis has shaken the axiom of the 
elementary nature of the so-called chemical elements in minds — 
formerly adverse to questioning that axiom. Believin ving the sci- 
