60 J. C. Graham — Experiments with an Artificial Geyser. 



quired was the same in both cases to the hundredth of a 

 second. 



From these experiments I am forced to the conclusion of 

 Mr. Arnold Hague, which he states in his paper entitled 

 " Soaping Geysers " read before the Xew York meeting of the 

 American Institute of Mining Engineers in February, 1889. 

 " Viscosity must tend to the retention of steam within the 

 basin, and, as is the case of superheated waters, where the 

 temperature stands at or above the boiling point, explosive 

 liberation must follow. All alkaline solutions, whether in the 

 laboratory or in nature, exhibit, by reason of this viscosity, a 

 tendency to bump and boil irregularly. Yiscosity in these 

 hot springs must also tend to the formation of bubbles and 

 foam when the steam rises to the surface, and this mixture 

 aids to bring about the explosive action, followed by a relief 

 of pressure, and this to liasten the final and more powerful 

 display." The retention of steam referred to in the above 

 cpiotation is an entirely distinct phenomenon from that of the 

 interference in the rise of steam bubbies investigated in my 

 experiments. It is an interference with the actual formation 

 of the bubbles rather than with the rise of them after forma- 

 tion. That such an interference does actually take place is 

 also shown by the fact that the bubbles liberated in the soap 

 geyser are far less numerous than in the case of the water 

 geyser. Also, when they occur in the case of the soap geyser, 

 they are large and of sudden formation, which would tend to 

 cause an overflow of the basin and thus to relieve the pressure. 



In these facts then in regard to the formation of the steam 

 bubbles, I take to lie the main explanation of the phenome- 

 non, believing the surface bubbles to be a much less important 

 factor. 



Physical Laboratory of Wesleyan University, 

 Middletown, Conn.. Oct. 12, 1892. 



