Guevara, Giovanni di, In Aristotelis mechanicas commentarii, 1627

Table of figures

< >
< >
page |< < of 303 > >|
    <archimedes>
      <text>
        <body>
          <chap id="N10019">
            <p id="N1501C" type="main">
              <s id="N15069">
                <pb pagenum="170" xlink:href="005/01/178.jpg"/>
              tim ſe dilatantes, & ab inuicem recedentes, neceſſariò im­
                <lb/>
              pingant in partes molis, quas ab eodem loco diſterminant,
                <lb/>
              vt ibidem ipſæ ſuccedant. </s>
              <s id="N1507D">Non enim abſque impulſu inde
                <lb/>
              poſſent eas expellere, nec abſque expulſione in earum lo­
                <lb/>
              cum ſuccedere. </s>
              <s id="N15084">Cumque impulſus fiat virtute impetus in
                <lb/>
              alterum vectis extremum impreſſi vbi adhibetur motoris
                <lb/>
              potentia; ſequitur verè extremitates ipſas KH, partes mo­
                <lb/>
              lis ſibi correſpondentes tanquam pondera ſcindendo diſtra­
                <lb/>
              here, ac mouere, prout Ariſtoteles intendebat. </s>
            </p>
            <p id="N1508F" type="main">
              <s id="N15091">Ad ſecundum verò Baldi argumentum reſpondetur, con­
                <lb/>
              cedendo ſæpè cuſpidem cunei, nihil in ſciſſura contingere;
                <lb/>
              negando tamen propterea nullam ibi vectis rationem inter­
                <lb/>
              cedere. </s>
              <s id="N1509A">Porrò extremum quo vectis pondera mouet, vt
                <lb/>
              plurimum non eſt vltimum punctum terminatiuum illius,
                <lb/>
              ſed ſufficit, vt ſit circa illud, vel ſaltem poſt fulcimentum,
                <lb/>
              quod intermediat inter pondus, & potentiam: Quare etiam
                <lb/>
              ſi vltimæ, & extremæ partes cunei, quæ verticem conſe­
                <lb/>
              quuntur quandoque molem ſcindendam ob rimæ latitudi­
                <lb/>
              nem nullo pacto attingant: adhuc tamen explicata ratio du­
                <lb/>
              plicis vectis in illo procedit applicando nimirum, quæ dicta
                <lb/>
              ſunt de vltimis partibus terminantibus in vertice, ad alias
                <lb/>
              partes ſequentes, vbi primo fit contactus inter molem, &
                <lb/>
              cuneum. </s>
            </p>
            <p id="N150B1" type="main">
              <s id="N150B3">Cæterum ſi quis vrgeat ex Guido Vbaldo, potius verti­
                <lb/>
              cem cunei eſſe commune
                <expan abbr="fulcimentũ">fulcimentum</expan>
              vtriuſque vectis pon­
                <lb/>
              dera verò mediare inter fulcimentum, ac potentiam, ita vt
                <lb/>
              vectis AB fulta in ipſo B moueat molis partem vbi eſt I,
                <lb/>
              tanquam onus verſus G.
                <expan abbr="Similiterq.">Similiterque</expan>
              vectis CB ibidem
                <lb/>
              fulta, partem L verſus D. </s>
              <s id="N150C9">Occurrendum eſt, hoc cum alijs,
                <lb/>
              quæ Guidus Vbaldus fusè proſequitur, probare quidem
                <lb/>
              talem pariter vectis rationem competere ipſis AB &
                <lb/>
              CB; prout conſtituuntur in cuneo: nihil tamen contra
                <lb/>
              Ariſtotelem concludere; cuius propterea diſcurſum refe­
                <lb/>
              rens Guidus Vbaldus minimè improbat. </s>
              <s id="N150D6">Nihil enim prohi­
                <lb/>
              bet, quominus idem numero vectis ſecundum diuerſas ra­
                <lb/>
              tiones ad duas, ac diuerſas vectium ſpecies pertineat, vtriuſ-</s>
            </p>
          </chap>
        </body>
      </text>
    </archimedes>
Impressum