Salusbury, Thomas
,
Mathematical collections and translations (Tome I)
,
1667
Text
Text Image
Image
XML
Thumbnail overview
Document information
None
Concordance
Figures
Thumbnails
List of thumbnails
<
1 - 10
11 - 20
21 - 30
31 - 40
41 - 50
51 - 60
61 - 70
71 - 80
81 - 90
91 - 100
101 - 110
111 - 120
121 - 130
131 - 140
141 - 150
151 - 160
161 - 170
171 - 180
181 - 190
191 - 200
201 - 210
211 - 220
221 - 230
231 - 240
241 - 250
251 - 260
261 - 270
271 - 280
281 - 290
291 - 300
301 - 310
311 - 320
321 - 330
331 - 340
341 - 350
351 - 360
361 - 370
371 - 380
381 - 390
391 - 400
401 - 410
411 - 420
421 - 430
431 - 440
441 - 450
451 - 460
461 - 470
471 - 480
481 - 490
491 - 500
501 - 510
511 - 520
521 - 530
531 - 540
541 - 550
551 - 560
561 - 570
571 - 580
581 - 590
591 - 600
601 - 610
611 - 620
621 - 630
631 - 640
641 - 650
651 - 660
661 - 670
671 - 680
681 - 690
691 - 700
701 - 701
>
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
<
1 - 10
11 - 20
21 - 30
31 - 40
41 - 50
51 - 60
61 - 70
71 - 80
81 - 90
91 - 100
101 - 110
111 - 120
121 - 130
131 - 140
141 - 150
151 - 160
161 - 170
171 - 180
181 - 190
191 - 200
201 - 210
211 - 220
221 - 230
231 - 240
241 - 250
251 - 260
261 - 270
271 - 280
281 - 290
291 - 300
301 - 310
311 - 320
321 - 330
331 - 340
341 - 350
351 - 360
361 - 370
371 - 380
381 - 390
391 - 400
401 - 410
411 - 420
421 - 430
431 - 440
441 - 450
451 - 460
461 - 470
471 - 480
481 - 490
491 - 500
501 - 510
511 - 520
521 - 530
531 - 540
541 - 550
551 - 560
561 - 570
571 - 580
581 - 590
591 - 600
601 - 610
611 - 620
621 - 630
631 - 640
641 - 650
651 - 660
661 - 670
671 - 680
681 - 690
691 - 700
701 - 701
>
page
|<
<
of 701
>
>|
<
archimedes
>
<
text
>
<
body
>
<
chap
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>
<
pb
xlink:href
="
040/01/274.jpg
"
pagenum
="
254
"/>
pearing in
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Caſſiopeia,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
tell me,
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Simplicius,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
whether you believe that
<
lb
/>
it might be in the ſame time placed in divers places, that is,
<
lb
/>
mongſt the Elements, aud alſo amongſt the planetary Orbs, and
<
lb
/>
alſo above theſe amongſt the fixed Stars, and yet again infinitely
<
lb
/>
more high.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg509
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
The method
<
lb
/>
ſerved by
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
Clar.
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
in
<
lb
/>
confuting the
<
lb
/>
ſtronomers, and by
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
Salviatus
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
in
<
lb
/>
ting him.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMP. </
s
>
<
s
>There is no doubt, but that it ought to be confeſſed
<
lb
/>
that it is but in one only place, and at one ſole and determinate
<
lb
/>
diſtance from the Earth.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>Therefore if the obſervations made by the
<
lb
/>
mers were exact, and the calculations made by this Author were
<
lb
/>
not erroneous, it were eaſie from all thoſe and all theſe to
<
lb
/>
collect the ſame diſtances alwayes to an hair, is not this true?</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMP. </
s
>
<
s
>My reaſon hitherto tells me that ſo it muſt needs be;
<
lb
/>
nor do I believe that the Author would contradict it</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>But when of many and many computations that have
<
lb
/>
been made, there ſhould not be ſo much as two onely that prove
<
lb
/>
true, what would you think of them?</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMP. </
s
>
<
s
>I would think that they were all falſe, either through
<
lb
/>
the fault of the computiſt, or through the defect of the
<
lb
/>
vators, and at the moſt that could be ſaid, I would ſay, that but
<
lb
/>
onely one of them and no more was true; but as yet I know not
<
lb
/>
which to chooſe.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>Would you then from falſe fundamentals deduce and
<
lb
/>
eſtabliſh a doubtful concluſion for ttue? </
s
>
<
s
>Certainly no. </
s
>
<
s
>Now the
<
lb
/>
calculations of this Author are ſuch, that no one of them agrees
<
lb
/>
with another, you may ſee then what credit is to be given to
<
lb
/>
them.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMP. Indeed, if it be ſo, this is a notable failing.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SAGR. </
s
>
<
s
>But by the way I have a mind to help
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Simplicius,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
and
<
lb
/>
the Author by telling
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Salviatus,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
that his arguments would hold
<
lb
/>
good if the Author had undertook to go about to find out
<
lb
/>
ly the diſtance of the Star from the Earth, which I do not think
<
lb
/>
to be his intention; but onely to demonſtrate that from thoſe
<
lb
/>
obſervations he collected that the Star was ſublunary. </
s
>
<
s
>So
<
lb
/>
that if from thoſe obſervations, and from all the computations
<
lb
/>
made thereon, the height of the Star be alwayes collected to be
<
lb
/>
leſſe than that of the Moon, it ſerves the Authors turn to
<
lb
/>
vince all thoſe Aſtronomers of moſt impardonable ignorance,
<
lb
/>
that through the defect either of Geometry or Arithmetick, have
<
lb
/>
not known how to draw true concluſions from their own
<
lb
/>
tions themſelves.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>It will be convenient therefore that I turn my ſelf to
<
lb
/>
you,
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Sagredus,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
who ſo cunningly aphold the Doctrine of this
<
lb
/>
Author. </
s
>
<
s
>And to ſee whether I can make
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Simplicius,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
though not
<
lb
/>
very expert in calcnlations, and demonſtrations to apprehend the </
s
>
</
p
>
</
chap
>
</
body
>
</
text
>
</
archimedes
>