Fabri, Honoré, Tractatus physicus de motu locali, 1646

Page concordance

< >
Scan Original
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
< >
page |< < of 491 > >|
    <archimedes>
      <text>
        <body>
          <chap id="N1EE3A">
            <pb pagenum="267" xlink:href="026/01/301.jpg"/>
            <p id="N20F7E" type="main">
              <s id="N20F80">Tertiò, quod ſpectat ad æqualitatem anguli reflexionis, & anguli in­
                <lb/>
              cidentiæ, non eſt alia huius æqualitatis ratio præter illam, quam attuli­
                <lb/>
              mus; </s>
              <s id="N20F88">nec eſt quod aliqui aliam rationem comminiſcantur, cuius prin­
                <lb/>
              cipia theſim ipſam ſupponunt; </s>
              <s id="N20F8E">nam primò ſupponunt omnem virtutem
                <lb/>
              quantumuis impeditam eniti maximè quantum poteſt, vt producat ef­
                <lb/>
              fectum ſecundùm intenſionem agentis; </s>
              <s id="N20F96">cùm fortè Geometra admitte­
                <lb/>
              ret hoc principium ſine alia probatione: an fortè virtus ipſa cognoſcit
                <lb/>
              intentionem, agentis, id eſt impetus potentiæ motricis? </s>
              <s id="N20F9E">numquid impe­
                <lb/>
              tus ipſe determinari debet ab ipſa potentia motrice? </s>
              <s id="N20FA3">numquid eſt deter­
                <lb/>
              minatio noua à plano reflectente? </s>
              <s id="N20FA8">an fortè potentia motrix intendit
                <lb/>
              motum per aliam lineam, quàm per lineam incidentiæ? </s>
              <s id="N20FAD">cum ipſa linea
                <lb/>
              reflexionis ſemper accidat præter intentionem potentiæ motricis natu­
                <lb/>
              ralis; denique licèt hoc totum verum eſſet, vnde probatur poſſe impe­
                <lb/>
              tum ad angulum reflexionis æqualem ſe ipſum determinare? </s>
              <s id="N20FB7">Secundò,
                <lb/>
              ſupponunt impetum eſſe indifferentem ad diuerſas lineas, quod ſanè ve­
                <lb/>
              rum eſt; </s>
              <s id="N20FBF">probare tamen deberent, & diſcernere impetum innatum ab
                <lb/>
              omni aliò, at, eſto id verum ſit; cur potiùs determinatur ad lineam quæ
                <lb/>
              faciat angulum æqualem, quàm inæqualem angulo incidentiæ? </s>
              <s id="N20FC7">ex hoc
                <lb/>
              enim principio non probatur hæc æqualitas. </s>
            </p>
            <p id="N20FCC" type="main">
              <s id="N20FCE">Tertiò, ſupponunt dextra fieri ſiniſtra in reflexione, & transferri an­
                <lb/>
              gulos, idque in eodem plano; </s>
              <s id="N20FD4">benè eſt; </s>
              <s id="N20FD8">rem factam ſupponunt, quam
                <lb/>
              nemo negat; </s>
              <s id="N20FDE">ſed propter quid fiat demonſtrandum eſſet; ſi enim quæ­
                <lb/>
              ram, cur in eodem plano ſint radius incidentiæ. </s>
              <s id="N20FE4">radius reflexus, & ſe­
                <lb/>
              ctio communis plani reflectentis? </s>
              <s id="N20FE9">non video quonam modo demon­
                <lb/>
              ſtrent. </s>
              <s id="N20FEE">Dicent fortè, quia ita fit in lumine; </s>
              <s id="N20FF2">belle! obſcurum per obſcu­
                <lb/>
              rius; </s>
              <s id="N20FF8">quippe ratio reflexionis clarior eſt in motu, quàm in flumine, vt
                <lb/>
              ſuo loco videbimus; </s>
              <s id="N20FFE">igitur negari poſſet de lumine, licèt verum ſit, do­
                <lb/>
              nec ſit demonſtratum; immò quamuis probatum eſſet de lumine, quis
                <lb/>
              vnquam deduxit à pari argumentum demonſtratiuum? </s>
              <s id="N21006">Dicent non eſſe
                <lb/>
              potiùs rationem, cur fiat per vnum planum ex aliis infinitis, quàm per
                <lb/>
              aliud; </s>
              <s id="N2100E">benè eſt, iam vtuntur illa negatiua ratione, quam paulò antè re­
                <lb/>
              ſpuebant, licèt optima ſit, nec quidquam in contrarium afferunt; </s>
              <s id="N21014">at ſo­
                <lb/>
              litariam eſſe non oportet; quippe vt iam ſuprà monui, effectus po­
                <lb/>
              ſitiuus per principium poſitiuum ad ſuam cauſam reducendus eſt. </s>
            </p>
            <p id="N2101C" type="main">
              <s id="N2101E">Denique dicent hanc eſſe demonſtrationem
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Aristotelis in Problematis
                <lb/>
              ſect.
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              17.
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Probl.
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              13. quod vt palam fiat, textum ipſum deſcribo,
                <emph type="italics"/>
              quamobrem,
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
                <lb/>
              inquit,
                <emph type="italics"/>
              corpora, quæ feruntur, vbi alicubi occurrerunt, reſilire in partem con­
                <lb/>
              trariam ſolent, nec niſi ad ſimiles angulos, an quod non ſolum eo feruntur im­
                <lb/>
              petu, quo pro ſua parte ipſa fieri aptiſſima ſunt, verùm etiam illo, qui à mittente
                <lb/>
              proficiſcitur; </s>
              <s id="N21040">ſuus igitur ceſſat cuique impetus, cum ſuum ad locum peruene­
                <lb/>
              rint, omnia namque requieſcere ſolent vbi in eam ſedem ſeſe contulerunt, quam
                <lb/>
              ſuapte naturâ deſiderant; </s>
              <s id="N21048">ſed externo illo, quem habent, impetu neceſſitas ori­
                <lb/>
              tur amplius mouendi; </s>
              <s id="N2104E">quod cùm in partem priorem effici neque at, quia re pro­
                <lb/>
              hibetur objecta, vel in latus, vel in rectum agi neceſſe eſt; </s>
              <s id="N21054">omnia autem in an­
                <lb/>
              gulos reſiliunt ſimiles, quoniam eodem ferri cogantur, quò motus ducat; </s>
              <s id="N2105A">quem
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              </s>
            </p>
          </chap>
        </body>
      </text>
    </archimedes>
Impressum