1917-18.] 
Thermodynamics of Adsorption. 
33 
Table II. — Carbon Dioxide. 
9 1°? 
0T 
22400. 
A. 
log l0 a. 
116° C. 
55°. 
15°. 
1 
CO 
CD 
o 
0° calc. 
A calc. 
A obs. 
A obs. — a calc. 
1-80 
(•293) 
(•269) 
(•285) 
(■273) 
•284 
(•on) 
1-70 
(•300) 
(•269) 
(•290) 
(•278) 
■280 
(•002) 
1-60 
•288 
(•273) 
•289 
*277 
•294 
•017 
1*40 
•295 
•283 
('287) 
•284 
•272 
•301 
•029 
1-20 
•299 
•300 
(•286) 
•296 
•284 
•307 
•023 
1-00 
•29 
•308 
•317 
(•287) 
•307 
•295 
•315 
•020 
0-80 
•28 
•317 
•305 
(■31) 
(■30) 
•324 
(*024) 
0-40 
•33 
■327 
•328 
(■33) 
(•32) 
•337 
(*015) 
o-oo 
•33 
•348 
•367 
, , . 
•346 
1-80 
•34 
•348 
... 
• > e 
... 
1-80 
•35 
... 
... 
... 
... 
... 
The variation from pV — RT would not affect any of the calculated values more than 
0’6 per cent., i.e. ‘002. 
Table III. — Nitrogen. 
RT 2 8 logy/22400. 
1 
A. 
logio 
116° C. 
55°. 
15°. 
-40°.* 
0° calc. 
a calc. 
a obs. 
A obs. — a calc. 
1T0 
•002 
•21 
1-00 
... 
... 
•003 
... 
•21 
... 
0-80 
•176 
•004 
(•17) 
(•16) 
•21 
(•05) 
0-50 
T95 
•176 
•010 
(■17) 
(•16) 
•22 
(•06) 
o-oo 
•202 
•193 
•178 
( - ve) 
(•17) 
(•16) 
•22 
(•06) 
1-80 
■227 
T54 
T86 
( — ve) 
(■18) 
(■17) 
•22 
(•05) 
1-50 
•202 
T67 
T89 
(■18) 
(•17) 
•24 
(■07) 
LOO 
*214 
T12 
(•237) 
• • . 
■29 
• . • 
2-80 
•277 
... 
... 
... 
The tabulated values evidently indicate either (1) some systematic error in 
the calorimetric observations, or (2) some systematic error in the thermo- 
dynamical formula. Even if we assume that Titoff observed the heat of 
adsorption at constant pressure, only in three doubtful cases out of twenty 
tabulated would the reduction by - 012 account for the discrepancy between 
calculated and observed values. Assuming the calorimetric observations 
to be sound, we may perhaps lead back the divergence to ignored terms 
in equation (19). We have 
* Apparently at the lowest temperature of observation, - 80° C., the charcoal was not 
allowed time to saturate itself. 
VOL. XXXVIII. 
3 
