1879.] Dr. A. Smith. Absorption of Gases by Charcoal. 323 



the rest of the inquiry would be easy ; this was extended to nitrogen, 

 but not by so many experiments as with oxygen. I am now assured 

 of a sound foundation for inquiries, which must take their beginning 

 from the results here given. 



It is found that charcoal absorbs gases in definite volumes, the 

 physical action resembling the chemical. 



Calling the volume of hydrogen absorbed 1, the volume of oxygen 

 absorbed is 8. That is, whilst hydrogen unites with eight times its 

 weight of oxygen to constitute water, charcoal absorbs eight times 

 more oxygen by volume than it absorbs hydrogen. ~No relation by 

 volume has been hitherto found the same as the relation by weight. 



The specific gravity of oxygen being 16 times greater than hydro- 

 gen, charcoal absorbs 8 times 16, or 128 times more oxygen by weight 

 than it does hydrogen. This is equal to the specific gravity of oxygen 



16 2 



squared and divided by two , or it is the atomic weight and 



2 



specific gravity multiplied into each other, 16 X 16, and divided by two 



—=128. 

 2 



Nitrogen was expected to act in a similar way, but it refused. 

 The average number of the latest inquiry is 4' 52, but the difficulty of 

 removing all the nitrogen from charcoal is great, and I suppose the 

 correct number to be 4*66. Taking this one as the weight absorbed, 

 14 2 



14 X 4*66 — 65*3, or it is — -. Oxygen is a dyad; nitrogen a triad. 

 o 



We have then carbonic acid not divided, but simply 22 squared 

 =484. 



Time is required for full speculation, but the chemist must be sur- 

 prised at the following : — 



Carbonic oxide 6 volumes. 



Carbonic acid, C0 2 6 + 16 „ =22 



Marsh-gas, CH 4 6 + 4 „ =10 



Protoxide of nitrogen, NO . 8+4'66 (N) (4"9) 12 "466. 



These four results belong to the early group not corroborated lately, 

 but so remarkably carrying out the principle of volume in this union 

 giving numbers the same as those of weight in chemical union, that 

 they scarcely require to be delayed. 



I am not willing to theorize much on the results ; it is here suffi- 

 cient to make a good beginning. We appear to have the formation of 

 a new series of molecules made by squaring our present chemical atoms, 

 and by certain other divisions peculiar to the gases themselves. Or it 

 may be that the larger molecule exists in the free gas, and chemical 

 combination breaks it up. These new and larger, molecules may lead 

 u s to the understanding of chemical combinations in organic chemistry, 



