Galilei, Galileo
,
The systems of the world
,
1661
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 - 720
721 - 750
751 - 780
781 - 810
811 - 840
841 - 870
871 - 900
901 - 930
931 - 948
>
Scan
Original
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
<
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 - 720
721 - 750
751 - 780
781 - 810
811 - 840
841 - 870
871 - 900
901 - 930
931 - 948
>
page
|<
<
of 948
>
>|
<
archimedes
>
<
text
>
<
body
>
<
chap
>
<
pb
xlink:href
="
065/01/351.jpg
"
pagenum
="
341
"/>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMP. No: For the point would be changed, and would be
<
lb
/>
beneath the ſtar firſt obſerved.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SAGR. </
s
>
<
s
>You are in the right. </
s
>
<
s
>Now like as that which in this
<
lb
/>
example anſwereth to the elevation of the Top-Gallant-Top, is
<
lb
/>
not the ſtar, but the point of the Firmament that lyeth in a right
<
lb
/>
line with the eye, and the ſaid top of the Maſt, ſo in the caſe
<
lb
/>
exemplified, that which in the Firmament anſwers to the Pole
<
lb
/>
of the Earth, is not a ſtar, or other fixed thing in the
<
lb
/>
ment; but is that point in which the Axis of the Earth
<
lb
/>
ed ſtreight out, till it cometh thither doth determine, which point
<
lb
/>
is not fixed, but obeyeth the mutations that the Pole of the
<
lb
/>
Earth doth make. </
s
>
<
s
>And therefore
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Tycho,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
or who ever elſe that
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg644
"/>
<
lb
/>
did alledg this objection, ought to have ſaid that upon that
<
lb
/>
ſame motion of the Earth, were it true, one might obſerve ſome
<
lb
/>
difference in the elevation and depreſſion (not of the Pole, but)
<
lb
/>
of ſome fixed ſtar toward that part which anſwereth to our Pole.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg644
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Upon the
<
lb
/>
al motion of the
<
lb
/>
Earth, alteration
<
lb
/>
may enſue in
<
lb
/>
ſome fixed ſtar,
<
lb
/>
not in the Pole.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMP. </
s
>
<
s
>I already very well underſtand the miſtake by them
<
lb
/>
committed; but yet therefore (which to me ſeems very great) of
<
lb
/>
the argument brought on the contrary is not leſſened,
<
lb
/>
ſing relation to be had to the variation of the ſtars, and not of
<
lb
/>
the Pole; for if the moving of the Ship but 60. miles, make a
<
lb
/>
fixed ſtar riſe to me one degree, ſhall I not find alike, yea and
<
lb
/>
very much greater mutation, if the Ship ſhould ſail towards the
<
lb
/>
ſaid ſtar for ſo much ſpace as is the Diameter of the Grand
<
lb
/>
Orb, which you affirm to be double the diſtance that is between
<
lb
/>
the Earth and Sun?</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SAGR. </
s
>
<
s
>Herein
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Simplicius,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
there is another fallacy, which,
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg645
"/>
<
lb
/>
truth is, you underſtand, but do not upon the ſudden think of
<
lb
/>
the ſame, but I will try to bring it to your remembrance: Tell
<
lb
/>
me therefore; if when after you have directed the Quadrant to
<
lb
/>
a fixed ſtar, and found
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
v. </
s
>
<
s
>g.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
its elevation to be 40. degrees,
<
lb
/>
you ſhould without ſtirring from the place, incline the ſide of
<
lb
/>
the Ouadrant, ſo as that the ſtar might remain elevated above
<
lb
/>
that direction, would you thereupon ſay that the ſtar had
<
lb
/>
red greater elevation?</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg645
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
The equivoke of
<
lb
/>
thoſe who believe
<
lb
/>
that in the annual
<
lb
/>
motion great
<
lb
/>
tations are to be
<
lb
/>
made about the
<
lb
/>
elevation of a
<
lb
/>
ed ſtar, is
<
lb
/>
ted.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMP. </
s
>
<
s
>Certainly no: For the mutation was made in the
<
lb
/>
ſtrument and not in the Obſerver, that did change place,
<
lb
/>
ving towards the ſame.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SAGR. </
s
>
<
s
>But if you ſail or walk along the ſurface of the
<
lb
/>
ſtrial Globe, will you ſay that there is no alteration made in the
<
lb
/>
ſaid Quadrant, but that the ſame elevarion is ſtill retained in
<
lb
/>
ſpect of the Heavens, ſo long as you your ſelf do not incline it,
<
lb
/>
but let it ſtand at its firſt conſtitution?</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMP. </
s
>
<
s
>Give me leave to think of it. </
s
>
<
s
>I would ſay without
<
lb
/>
more ado, that it would not retain the ſame, in regard the </
s
>
</
p
>
</
chap
>
</
body
>
</
text
>
</
archimedes
>