No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Dielectric Constants of Non‐Polar Fluids. II. Analysis of Experimental Data
1.William F. Brown, Jr., J. Chem. Phys. 18, 1193 (1950).
2.J. Yvon, Actualités Scientifiques et Industrielles, Nos. 542 and 543 (Hermann et Cie., Paris, France, 1937).
3.John G. Kirkwood, J. Chem. Phys. 4, 592–601 (1936).
4.C. J. F. Bȯttcher, Physica 9, 937–944and 945 (1942).
5.S. S. Kurtz, Jr. and A. L. Ward, J. Franklin Inst. 222, 563–592 (1936);
5.S. S. Kurtz, Jr. and A. L. Ward, 224, 583–601and 697 (1937)., J. Franklin Inst.
6.Z. T. Chang, Chinese J. Phys. 1, 1–55 (1934).
7.W. E. Danforth, Jr., Phys. Rev. 38, 1224–1235 (1931).
8.P. W. Bridgman, Rev. Mod. Phys. 18, 1–93 (1946), p. 71.
9.With correction of an obvious misprint in the value at
10.P. W. Bridgman, Proc. Am. Acad. 49, 1–114 (1913), Table XI, p. 62.
11.E. T. Whittaker and G. Robinson, The Calculus of Observations, 4th editon (Blackie and Sons, Ltd., London, 1944), p. 245;
11.A. C. Aitken, Statistical Mathematics, 4th edition (Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh and London; Interscience Publishers, Inc., New York, 1945), p. 116.
12.See E T. Whittaker and G. Robinson, reference 11, pp. 241, 246. A similar formula, expressing the mean product of the errors in two unknowns in terms of non‐diagonal elements is easily derived: see D. Brunt, The Combination of Observations (Cambridge University Press, London, 1917), pp. 116–117.
13. is the sum of a term due to experimental error and a term due to rounding to the second decimal place; the latter is negligible.
14.The standard deviation of is calculated from those of and and and from their coefficient of correlation by means of the formula This formula is obtained from the first‐order formula for the error in a single experiment, by squaring and averaging over many experiments. The correlation between the errors in and has therefore been taken into account; but since the error in is almost as large as itself, the first‐order formula is not very reliable.
15.See E. T. Whittaker and G. Robinson, reference 11, p. 214.
16.A. Michels and L. Kleerekoper, Physica 6, 586–590 (1939).
17.Joseph S. Rosen, J. Chem. Physics 17, 1192–1197 (1949). Rosen’s values of and (his m and b) for carbon disulfide at 30° differ slightly from those given here because of the different weights used.
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...
Most read this month
Most cited this month