0·5 cms. apart
| Volts | Current |
|---|---|
| ·125 | 18 |
| ·25 | 36 |
| ·5 | 55 |
| 1 | 67 |
| 2 | 72 |
| 4 | 79 |
| 8 | 85 |
| 16 | 88 |
| 100 | 94 |
| 335 | 100 |
Table II.
2·5 cms. apart
| Volts | Current |
|---|---|
| ·5 | 7·3 |
| 1 | 14 |
| 2 | 27 |
| 4 | 47 |
| 8 | 64 |
| 16 | 73 |
| 37·5 | 81 |
| 112 | 90 |
| 375 | 97 |
| 800 | 100 |
The results are shown graphically in [Fig. 4].
Fig. 4.
From the above tables it is seen that the current at first increases nearly in proportion to the voltage. There is no evidence of complete saturation, although the current increases very slowly for large increases of voltage. For example, in Table I. a change of voltage from ·125 to ·25 volts increases the current from 18 to 36% of the maximum, while a change of voltage from 100 to 335 volts increases the current only 6%. The variation of the current per volt (assumed uniform between the range of voltages considered) is thus about 5000 times greater for the former change.
Taking into consideration the early part of the curves, the current does not reach a practical maximum as soon as would be expected on the simple ionization theory. It seems probable that the slow increase with the large voltages is due either to an action of the electric field on the rate of production of ions, or to the difficulty of removing the ions produced near the surface of the uranium before recombination. It is possible that the presence of a strong electric field may assist in the separation of ions which otherwise would not initially escape from the sphere of one another’s attraction. From the data obtained by Townsend for the conditions of production of fresh ions at low pressures by the movement of ions through the gas, it seems that the increase of current cannot be ascribed to an action of the moving ions in the further ionization of the gas.