356 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts, and Letters. 
The computation of table 5 involves a good deal of work 
but I see no way of escaping the work if the result is desired. 
Table 1 can be constructed graphically and the results ob¬ 
tained by measurement, although little time will thus be 
saved. But no such procedure is possible for table 5 and the 
information derived from this table is quite as valuable as 
that from table 1. From table 1, for instance, we learn that 
nearly 102 g. cm. (col. E) were needed to warm the 6 m.-7 m. 
stratum from 4° to 22.3° and that heat amounting to 1260 
cal. (col. F) was transported from the surface into that 
stratum. We learn that 223 g. cm. were needed to warm all 
the water below 15 m. and that 1800 cal. were transported 
into that part of the lake. 
Table 5 shows, for example, that of the 102 g. cm. used in 
warming the 6 m.-7 m. stratum, 7.85 g. cm. were used 
(col. E) within the stratum itself and the remainder between 
0 m. and 6 m. It shows that over 68 g. cm. were used in 
that stratum (col. D) to carry through it the 7630 cal. which 
went to the water below 7 m. Col. H shows that of the 223 
g. cm* used to warm the water below 15 m. only about 35 
g. cm. were used within the lower water itself, leaving 188 
g. cm. as the amount used in bringing the 1800 cal. down to 
the 15 m. level. 
11. THE CURVE OF DISTRIBUTED WORK COMPUTED BY FIVE- 
METER INTERVALS. 
The curve of distributed work can also be computed by 5 
m. intervals, as is shown in the accompanying table. As in 
the case of the direct curve, the total result is closely similar 
to that reached by using 1 m. intervals but the distribution 
differs. In those strata where the volume of the single meters 
declines rapidly, the 5 m. interval gives results differing 
considerably from the 1 m. This is seen especially on com¬ 
paring the strata for 0 m.-5 m. and 20 m.-24 m. in table 6 
with the corresponding strata of table 5. 
