Salusbury, Thomas
,
Mathematical collections and translations (Tome I)
,
1667
Text
Text Image
Image
XML
Thumbnail overview
Document information
None
Concordance
Figures
Thumbnails
Page concordance
<
1 - 30
31 - 60
61 - 90
91 - 120
121 - 150
151 - 180
181 - 210
211 - 240
241 - 270
271 - 300
301 - 330
331 - 360
361 - 390
391 - 420
421 - 450
451 - 480
481 - 510
511 - 540
541 - 570
571 - 600
601 - 630
631 - 660
661 - 690
691 - 701
>
Scan
Original
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
<
1 - 30
31 - 60
61 - 90
91 - 120
121 - 150
151 - 180
181 - 210
211 - 240
241 - 270
271 - 300
301 - 330
331 - 360
361 - 390
391 - 420
421 - 450
451 - 480
481 - 510
511 - 540
541 - 570
571 - 600
601 - 630
631 - 660
661 - 690
691 - 701
>
page
|<
<
of 701
>
>|
<
archimedes
>
<
text
>
<
body
>
<
chap
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>
<
pb
xlink:href
="
040/01/136.jpg
"
pagenum
="
118
"/>
Therefore, &c. </
s
>
<
s
>The moſt proper and genuine anſwer to this
<
lb
/>
gation is contained in the Argument it ſelf; and even
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Aristotle
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
puts it in our mouths, which it is impoſſible,
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Simplicius,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
that you
<
lb
/>
ſhould not have ſeen.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg303
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
The anſwer to
<
lb
/>
the ſecond
<
lb
/>
ment.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMPL. </
s
>
<
s
>I neither have ſeen it, nor do I yet apprehend it.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>This cannot be, ſure, the thing is ſo very plain.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMPL. </
s
>
<
s
>I will with your leave, caſt an eye upon the
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Text.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SAGR. </
s
>
<
s
>We will command the
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Text
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
to be brought forthwith.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMPL. </
s
>
<
s
>I alwayes carry it about with me: See here it is, and
<
lb
/>
I know the place perfectly well, which is in
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
lib. 2. De Cælo, cap.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
16. Here it is,
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Text
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
97.
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Preterea omnia, quæ feruntur latione
<
lb
/>
circulari ſubdeficere videntur, ac moveri pluribus una latione,
<
lb
/>
præter primam Sphæram; quare & Terram neceſſariam eſt, ſive
<
lb
/>
circa medium, ſive in medio poſita feratur, duabus moveri
<
lb
/>
lationibus. </
s
>
<
s
>Si autem hoc acciderit, neceſſariam eſt fieri
<
lb
/>
tiones, ac converſiones fixorum aſtrorum. </
s
>
<
s
>Hoc autem non
<
lb
/>
tur ficri, ſed ſemper eadem, apud eadem loca ipſius, &
<
lb
/>
tur, & occidunt.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
[In Engliſh thus:] Furthermore all that are
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg304
"/>
<
lb
/>
carried with circular motion, ſeem to ^{*} foreſlow, and to move
<
lb
/>
with more than one motion, except the firſt Sphere; wherefore
<
lb
/>
it is neceſſary that the Earth move with two motions, whether
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg305
"/>
<
lb
/>
it be carried about the ^{*} middle, or placed in the middle. </
s
>
<
s
>But
<
lb
/>
if it be ſo, there would of neceſſity be alterations and
<
lb
/>
ons made amongſt the fixed Stars. </
s
>
<
s
>But no ſuch thing is ſeen to
<
lb
/>
be done, but the ſame Star doth alwayes riſe and ſet in the ſame
<
lb
/>
place. </
s
>
<
s
>In all this I find not any falacy, and my thinks the
<
lb
/>
ment is very forcible.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg304
"/>
* Subdeſicere.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg305
"/>
* Or Centre.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>And this new reading of the place hath confirmed me
<
lb
/>
in the fallacy of the Sillogiſme, and moreover, diſcovered
<
lb
/>
ther falſity. </
s
>
<
s
>Therefore obſerve. </
s
>
<
s
>The Poſitions, or if you will,
<
lb
/>
Concluſions, which
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Ariſtotle
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
endeavours to oppoſe, are two; one
<
lb
/>
is that of thoſe, who placing the Earth in the midſt of the World,
<
lb
/>
do make it move in it ſelf about its own centre. </
s
>
<
s
>The other is of
<
lb
/>
thoſe, who conſtituting it far from the middle, do make it
<
lb
/>
volve with a circular motion about the middle of the Univerſe.
<
lb
/>
</
s
>
<
s
>And both theſe Poſitions he conjointly impugneth with one and
<
lb
/>
the ſame argument. </
s
>
<
s
>Now I affirm that he is out in both the one
<
lb
/>
and the other impugnation; and that his error againſt the firſt
<
lb
/>
Poſition is an Equivoke or Paralogiſme; and his miſtake
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg306
"/>
<
lb
/>
ing the ſecond is a falſe conſequence. </
s
>
<
s
>Let us begin with the firſt
<
lb
/>
Aſſertion, which conſtituteth the Earth in the midſt of the
<
lb
/>
World, and maketh it move in it ſelf about its own centre; and
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg307
"/>
<
lb
/>
let us confront it with the objection of
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Ariſtotle
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
; ſaying, All
<
lb
/>
moveables, that move circularly, ſeem to ^{*} foreſlow, and move
<
lb
/>
with more than one Byas, except the firſt Sphere (that is
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
the pri-
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
</
chap
>
</
body
>
</
text
>
</
archimedes
>