The dissociation of dolomite. II
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 March 2018
Extract
In this paper further evidence is put forward in support of a previous paper on the subject. Very soon after the reading of that paper, A. E. Mitchell read a paper before the Chemical Society on a closely related subject. Working quite independently, and employing other methods of investigation, Mitchell arrived at conclusions in close agreement with those detailed in the former paper. H.L.J. Bäckström has criticized Mitchell's paper, raising some objections 'against the experimental evidence produced aud the … way of interpreting it'. Where Bäckström objections touch on anything in Mitchell's paper which is incidentally akin to any of the work described in this or the earlier paper, they will be discussed herein.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Mineralogical magazine and journal of the Mineralogical Society , Volume 21 , Issue 112 , March 1926 , pp. 21 - 24
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1926
References
page 21 note 1 Garnett, C. S., The dissociation of dolomite. Min. Mag., 1928, vol. 20, pp. 64-69 Google Scholar.
page 21 note 2 Mitchell, A. E., Journ. Chem. Soc. London, 1928, voL 128, p. 1055.Google Scholar
page 21 note 3 Backström, H. L. J., Journ. Chem. Soc. London, 1924, vol. 125, p. 480 Google Scholar.
page 21 note 4 Marc, E. and Šimek, A., Zeits. Anorg. Chem., 1918, vol. 82, p. 17 Google Scholar.
page 21 note 5 Grönberg, K., Zeits. Anorg. Chem., 1918, vol. 80, p. 887 Google Scholar.
page 21 note 6 Knibbs, N. V. S., Lime and magnesia. London, 1924, p 82 Google Scholar.
page 21 note 7 Shaw, J. B. & Bole, G. A., Journ. Amev. Cerarn. Soc, 1922, vol 5, pp 811, 817.Google Scholar
page 22 note 1 Desch, C. H., The chemistry and testing of cement. London, 1911, p. 57 Google Scholar.
- 2
- Cited by