Galilei, Galileo, De Motu Antiquiora

List of thumbnails

< >
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
< >
page |< < of 161 > >|
259 namely that one weight is then carried downward and raises the other, when it is heavier than the other. Besides, in the case of natural mobiles, just as in the case of the weights of a balance, the cause of all motions, upward as well as downward, can be reduced to heaviness alone. For when a thing is carried upward, it is at that time raised by the heaviness of the medium; just as, if a beam lighter than water were being kept by force under water, then, because the submerged beam has lifted a quantity of water equal to its own size, and an amount of water as great in size as the size of the beam is heavier than the beam, then, doubtless, the beam will be raised by the heaviness of that water, and it will be impelled upward: and in this way upward motion will be brought about by the heaviness of the medium and the lightness of the mobile{1}; and downward motion by the heaviness of the mobile and the lightness of the medium. {2}And from this, contrary to Aristotle in text #89 of Book I of the <i>De Caelo</i>, someone will easily be able to conclude, in what way things that are moved, are moved, somehow, by force and through the extrusion of the medium: for water extrudes violently the beam that has been submerged by force, when, in going down, it returns towards its proper region, and does not want to suffer that, that which is lighter than it, should remain under it; and, in the same way, the stone is extruded {1} and impelled downward because it is heavier than the medium. Nor is Aristotle's argument valid, when he says {1}, If it were forced it would be weakened at the end, and not be increased, as it is: for forced motion is weakened only when the mobile will have been outside the hand of the mover, and not while it is linked to the mover. {2}

Search results

< >
Searching "tower" (fulltextMorph)
1. Page 16, Sentence 4:How ridiculous this opinion is, is clearer than daylight: for who will ever believe that if, for example, two lead balls were released from the sphere of the Moon, one being a hundred times larger than the other, if the larger took an hour to come to Earth, the smaller would use in its motion a space of time of a hundred hours? or, if from a high tower {1}, two stones, one being double the size of the other, were thrown at the same moment, that, when the smaller was at mid-tower, the larger would already have reached the ground?
2. Page 24, Sentence 18:For if one takes two different mobiles, which have such properties that one is carried twice as swiftly as the other, and then releases them from the top of a tower, it will certainly not hit the ground faster, twice as swiftly: what is more, if one makes the observation, the one which is lighter at the beginning of the motion will precede the heavier and will be faster.
3. Page 68, Sentence 9:But this way of thinking is not only false, but ridiculous: for, if it were true, it would follow that a stone going down from a very high tower would be moved more slowly at mid-tower, than if the same stone were falling to the ground from a very low place, and for this reason the mobile [falling from a greater height] would also make a lesser impact.
4. Page 76, Sentence 3:There is a fourth well-known argument concerning a large stone going down from a tower, which will not be sufficiently blocked by a pebble impelled upward by force, so as to permit the pebble to be at rest for any time: hence surely the pebble will not be at rest at the ultimate point of its upward motion, and Aristotle notwithstanding, it will make use of the ultimate point for the two limits, namely of upward motion and of downward motion; and the ultimate instant is taken twice, namely, for the end of one time and for the beginning of the other.
5. Page 79, Sentence 4:Now in the case of heavier things, since a great amount of contrary force must be consumed in their descent, a greater time will be required for it to be consumed; in which time, since they are carried swiftly, they will descend a great distance: since we cannot avail ourselves of such great distances from which to release heavy things, it is not astonishing if the stone, released from merely the height of a tower, will seem to accelerate all the way to the ground; for this short distance and short time of motion are not sufficient to destroy the whole contrary force.
6. Page 84, Sentence 6:Yet experience shows the contrary: for it is true that wood at the beginning of its motion is carried more speedily than lead; but a little later the motion of lead is so accelerated that it leaves the wood behind, and, if they are released from a high tower, the lead gets ahead of it by a large distance: and I have often put this to the test. {1}
7. Page 134, Sentence 6:But if we go up a very high tower, on the top of which there is a bathtub, the same thing will happen to us when in it as if we were to go into the sea: for we will not be weighed down by the water, even though the latter, having air underneath it, is outside its proper place.
8. Page 150, Sentence 12:For if a stone goes down from a high tower, its swiftness seems always to be increased: yet this happens because the stone, in comparison /// with the medium through which it is carried, namely air, is very heavy; and since it goes away with an amount of impressed force as great as its heaviness, it assuredly goes away with a great impressed force, which the motion from the height of a tower is not sufficient to consume, so that the swiftness is always intensified all through the height of a single tower.

Text layer

  • Dictionary
  • Search results
  • Places

Text normalization

  • Original
  • Regularized
  • Normalized

Search


Clear
  • Exact
  • All forms
  • Fulltext index
  • Morphological index