4.8 Article

Bunsen the Geochemist: Icelandic Volcanism, Geyser Theory, and Gas, Rock and Mineral Analyses

Journal

ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION
Volume 60, Issue 3, Pages 1066-1081

Publisher

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/anie.202008727

Keywords

eudiometry; geochemistry; Hekla; inductive method; mineralogy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

After participating in a geochemical expedition to Iceland in 1845-1846, Bunsen accurately characterized volcanic gases, classified fundamental rock types, and revealed the correct mechanism of geyser action. He vehemently opposed hypotheses and differed with other scientists on the chemical compositions of rocks and minerals.
Following the eruption of Hekla in 1845-1846 Bunsen was invited by King Christian VIII of Denmark and Iceland to participate in a geochemical expedition to Iceland together with the geologist Sartorius von Waltershausen and the physiologist Carl Bergmann from Gottingen. The French mineralogist Des Cloizeaux went to Iceland separately and joined the expedition. The eudiometer invented by Bunsen was crucial for his accurate characterization of volcanic gases and determination of the composition of mixtures. His analyses of the chemical compositions of numerous rocks and minerals led him to the classification of two fundamental rock types, the more silica rich (nowadays called felsic) and the less silica rich, more basic (mafic) in agreement with Des Cloizeaux and the Danish scientist J. C. Schythe. Bunsen also formulated the correct mechanism of geyser action and helped disband the theory of connections between geysers, volcanoes and the sea. He disagreed vehemently with Waltershausen over the mechanisms of formation of sal ammoniac and of volcanic rocks and their chemical compositions. He revealed himself as an ardent experimentalist vigorously opposed to hypotheses of any kind, which also made him dismiss the new chemical theories, for example, those of Dumas and Kekule.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available