old_1971#
J. G. Old, K. L. Gentili and E. R. Peck, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 61, 89 (1971)
Source record · Catalogue · Review register
No DOI is recorded.
Source kind: measurement
Recorded technique: Modified Michelson interferometer with corner-cube reflectors (the apparatus of Peck & Khanna and Peck & Fisher), the mercury green line (0.5462258 um) as reference; refractivity ratios to other lines from 0.48 to 1.82 um. CO2 with at most 100 ppm impurities (N2, O2, H2O).
Materials in structured entries: CO2
Dataset quantities: refractivity
Contents: 2 datasets; 1 formula.
Curation notes#
Identity: the library record is UNVERIFIED; the text is ‘Dispersion of Carbon Dioxide’ by J. G. Old, K. L. Gentili and E. R. Peck (University of Idaho, received 29 June 1970), from the M.S. theses of Old and Gentili. The citation J. Opt. Soc. Am. 61, 89 (1971) is the one assigned here; it could not be checked against the record (no DOI or page numbers are recorded) and is to be verified.
Reduction to 1 atm and 0 C with ‘a simple virial expansion for the compressibility’, Z = 1 - P (9.0143 - 0.048529 T + 6.980e-5 T^2) 1e-5 fitted to Hilsenrath’s tables (pdf p. 1; the unit of P is not stated): density = real. Wavelengths are vacuum. The absolute value at 0.5462 um is (n - 1) 10^7 = 4505.0 +- 0.6 (pdf p. 1; the level is not stated); ‘to preserve the accuracy of the ratio of refractivities ... three decimals have been added’. The rms difference between the experimental values and the fit is 0.030 (pdf p. 1), taken as the per-point uncertainty (absolute = 0.030, rms), and the absolute value’s 0.6/4505 = 1.33e-4 as the scale uncertainty (systematic_relative). Impurities are said to affect the data less than the stated error.
The Sellmeier formula’s left-hand side, (n - 1) 10^5, is only in the equation image (eq_8da9a196527f); the library’s Markdown loses it. Table II gives a derived Verdet ‘S’ factor (the ratio of Ingersoll & Liebenberg’s measured Verdet constants to the normal Verdet constant from this dispersion formula); it is not refractive-index data and is not extracted. Its values are not monotonic at 0.8000 um (0.463, 0.400, 0.416, 0.366 at 0.75, 0.80, 0.85, 0.90 um), suggesting a misprint there, which cannot be resolved from the paper. Other results (pdf p. 2): absorption wavelengths 4.13, 0.1290 and 0.0689 um with oscillator strengths 1.28e-4, 0.240 and 6.90; (n^2 - 1)_inf 1e6 = 936 against the measured dielectric constant 922 +- 1; Rayleigh cross section 1.17e-28 cm^2 at 0.6943 um and 60 degrees.
Recorded bibliographic identity status: VALIDATED_WITH_WARNINGS. This concerns identification of the source; it does not establish the scientific correctness of its contents.
Datasets#
old_1971/experiment#
{
"id": "experiment",
"material": "CO2",
"file": "CO2/old_1971__experiment.csv",
"table": "tbl_02a196e116e3",
"quantity": "refractivity",
"scale": 1e-07,
"abscissa_unit": "um",
"wavelength_medium": "vacuum",
"state": "1atm_0C",
"density": "real",
"use": "primary",
"uncertainty": {
"absolute": 0.03,
"level": "rms",
"systematic_relative": 0.000133
}
}
All 19 points (none excluded from the fit in the paper).
old_1971/predicted#
{
"id": "predicted",
"material": "CO2",
"file": "CO2/old_1971__predicted.csv",
"table": "tbl_02a196e116e3",
"quantity": "refractivity",
"scale": 1e-07,
"abscissa_unit": "um",
"wavelength_medium": "vacuum",
"state": "1atm_0C",
"density": "real",
"use": "check"
}
Table I ‘Predicted’: the three-term Sellmeier formula at the measured wavelengths (two errata).
Formulas#
old_1971/sellmeier#
{
"id": "sellmeier",
"form": "dn_sigma2",
"terms": {
"scale": "1e-5",
"B": [
"0.154489",
"8309.1927",
"287.64190"
],
"C": [
"0.0584738",
"210.92417",
"60.122959"
]
},
"range_nm": [
480.1,
1817.2
],
"material": "CO2",
"equation": "pdf p. 1 (unnumbered; equation image eq_8da9a196527f)",
"printed": "(n - 1) 10^5 = 0.154489/(0.0584738 - sigma^2) + 8309.1927/(210.92417 - sigma^2) + 287.64190/(60.122959 - sigma^2)",
"variable": "sigma: vacuum wavenumber in um^-1",
"state": "1atm_0C",
"density": "real",
"range": "0.4801-1.8172 um (the data)",
"coefficients": {
"B1": "0.154489",
"C1": "0.0584738",
"B2": "8309.1927",
"C2": "210.92417",
"B3": "287.64190",
"C3": "60.122959"
},
"check": "Reproduces Table I's predicted column to 0.001 at 17 of 19 wavelengths (the other two are the errata); rms 0.029 against the experimental values (paper: 0.030); poles at 4.135, 0.1290 and 0.0689 um and (n^2 - 1)_inf = 936.6e-6 as stated (checked 2026-09-24)."
}
The left-hand side (n - 1) 10^5 is only in the equation image; with it the formula gives (n - 1) 10^7 directly after multiplying by 100. The first term is the 4.25 um infrared band.
Corrections#
[
{
"dataset": "predicted",
"row": "0.9227030",
"column": "value",
"printed": "4434.595",
"corrected": "4435.595",
"reason": "The predicted value is printed 1.000 too low: the row's difference column (-0.011) with the experimental 4435.584 requires 4435.595, and the column would otherwise fall by 1 between two neighbours 1.0 apart.",
"evidence": "The paper's Sellmeier formula at 0.9227030 um gives 4435.595 (checked 2026-09-24); image tbl_02a196e116e3.jpg prints 4434.595."
},
{
"dataset": "predicted",
"row": "0.8777160",
"column": "value",
"printed": "4440.310",
"corrected": "4440.332",
"reason": "The printed predicted value is 0.022 below the formula, which every other row reproduces to 0.001; with the formula's 4440.332 the difference from the experimental 4440.321 is -0.011, the printed difference's magnitude with the opposite sign (printed +0.011, consistent with the misprinted prediction).",
"evidence": "The paper's Sellmeier formula at 0.8777160 um gives 4440.332 (checked 2026-09-24); image tbl_02a196e116e3.jpg prints 4440.310 and +0.011. The experimental value 4440.321 is kept as printed: the printed difference +0.011 is printed experiment minus printed prediction, so the prediction was miscomputed; the alternative needs two misprints (the experimental value and the prediction) (second read 2026-09-25; TC-102)."
}
]
Formula corrections, where recorded, appear with their formulas above. Curation notes may also discuss corrections or unresolved interpretation. Consult the review register for the checks and decisions.