radiator, levels the grating till the image of the eye is seen reflected by the mirror.
I first obtained an approximate value of the wavelength with a 2-cm. grating, and then took careful and systematic readings with the different gratings. By different gratings is meant the same curved piece of ebonite, on which strips of different breadths were successively applied. The grating was found fairly adjusted, and the readings taken on the right side of the grating agreed well with the corresponding ones on the left side. I did not, therefore, think it necessary to take double readings, but took the various readings alternately on the right and on the left side. In one case only I found the grating on one side giving slightly better reading than the other. When the incident angle is too oblique, the diffracted image is not sharp, and I therefore did not extend the reading beyond 40° of incidence. Spectra of the first order only were observed. The response in the receiving circuit was somewhat feeble when 1 cm. or 1·5 cm. grating was used. But a 2-cm. grating gave stronger indications. With 2·5 and 3 cm. gratings the response was very energetic and the definition of the diffracted spectrum very sharp. For example, when the receiver was kept fixed, and the angle of incidence gradually varied, there was an abrupt and strong response produced in the receiving circuit, as soon as the angle of incidence attained the proper value. A slight variation of this angle, even of less than a quarter of a degree, produced displacement of the diffracted image, and there was then no further action on the receiver. Had my graduated circle permitted it, I could have got more accurate readings. The radial arms carrying the receiver and radiator were of too primitive a design to make it worth while to attempt greater accuracy. I give below the readings of the angles of incidence and the corresponding angles of diffraction obtained with the different gratings, and the wave-length deduced from them.
|i.||θ||λ||Mean λ for A.|