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
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
<
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
="
040/01/257.jpg
"
pagenum
="
239
"/>
motions, operations, and other accidents, by which their natures
<
lb
/>
are diſtinguiſhed, would not deprive us of the power of coming
<
lb
/>
to the knowledge of them; although he ſhould remove thoſe
<
lb
/>
perations, in which they unitedly concur, and which for that reaſon
<
lb
/>
are of no uſe for the diſtinguiſhing of thoſe natures.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMP. </
s
>
<
s
>I think your diſſertation to be very good.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>But that the Earth, Water, Air, are of a nature equally
<
lb
/>
conſtituted immoveable about the centre, is it not the opinion of
<
lb
/>
your ſelf,
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Ariſtotle, Prolomy,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
and all their ſectators?</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMP. </
s
>
<
s
>Its on all hands granted as an undeniable truth.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>Then from this common natural condition of
<
lb
/>
cence about the centre, there is no argument drawn of the different
<
lb
/>
natures of theſe Elements, and things elementary, but that
<
lb
/>
knowledge muſt be collected from other qualities not common;
<
lb
/>
and therefore whoſo ſhould deprive the Elements of this common
<
lb
/>
reſt only, and ſhould leave unto them all their other operations,
<
lb
/>
would not in the leaſt block up the way that leadeth to the
<
lb
/>
ledge of their eſſences. </
s
>
<
s
>But
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Copernicus
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
depriveth them onely of
<
lb
/>
this common reſt, and changeth the ſame into a common motion,
<
lb
/>
leaving them gravity, levity, the motions upwards, downwards, </
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg477
"/>
<
lb
/>
ſlower, faſter, rarity, denſity, the qualities of hot, cold, dry, moiſt,
<
lb
/>
and in a word, all things beſides. </
s
>
<
s
>Therefore ſuch an abſurdity, as
<
lb
/>
this Authour imagineth to himſelf, is no
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Copernican
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
poſition; nor
<
lb
/>
doth the concurrence in an identity of motion import any more or
<
lb
/>
leſs, than the concurrence in an identity of reſt about the
<
lb
/>
fying, or not diverſifying of natures. </
s
>
<
s
>Now tell us, if there be any
<
lb
/>
argument to the contrary.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg477
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
The concurrence
<
lb
/>
of the Elements in
<
lb
/>
a common motion
<
lb
/>
importeth no more
<
lb
/>
or leſſe, than their
<
lb
/>
concurrence in a
<
lb
/>
common reſt.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMP. </
s
>
<
s
>There followeth a fourth objection, taken from a
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg478
"/>
<
lb
/>
ral obſervation, which is,
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
That bodies of the ſame kind, have
<
lb
/>
tions that agree in kinde, or elſe they agree in reſt. </
s
>
<
s
>But by the
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
pernican Hypotheſis,
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
bodies that agree in kinde, and are moſt ſem-
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg479
"/>
<
lb
/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
blable to one another, would be very diſcrepant, yea diametrically
<
lb
/>
repugnant as to motion; for that Stars ſo like to one another, would
<
lb
/>
be nevertheleſſe ſo unlike in motion, as that ſix Planets would
<
lb
/>
tually turn round; but the Sun and all the fixeed Stars would ſtand
<
lb
/>
perpetually immoveable.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg478
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
A fourth
<
lb
/>
ment againſt
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
pernicus.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg479
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Bodies of the
<
lb
/>
ſame kinde have
<
lb
/>
motions that agree
<
lb
/>
in kinde.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>The forme of the argument appeareth good; but yet
<
lb
/>
I believe that the application or matter is defective: and if the
<
lb
/>
Authour will but perſiſt in his aſſumption, the conſequence ſhall
<
lb
/>
make directly againſt him. </
s
>
<
s
>The Argument runs thus; Amongſt
<
lb
/>
mundane bodies, ſix there are that do perpetually move, and they
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg480
"/>
<
lb
/>
are the ſix Planets; of the reſt, that is, of the Earth, Sun, and
<
lb
/>
fixed Stars, it is diſputable which of them moveth, and which
<
lb
/>
ſtands ſtill, it being neceſſary, that if the Earth ſtand ſtill, the Sun
<
lb
/>
and ſixed Stars do move; and it being alſo poſſible, that the Sun </
s
>
</
p
>
</
chap
>
</
body
>
</
text
>
</
archimedes
>