Fabri, Honoré, Tractatus physicus de motu locali, 1646

Table of figures

< >
< >
page |< < of 491 > >|
    <archimedes>
      <text>
        <body>
          <chap id="N24CC8">
            <p id="N25488" type="main">
              <s id="N25498">
                <pb pagenum="342" xlink:href="026/01/376.jpg"/>
              ſed iam hoc potiſſimum ſupereſt, vt difficultatem propoſitam de rota
                <lb/>
              Ariſtotelica breuiter ſoluamus, </s>
            </p>
            <p id="N254A9" type="main">
              <s id="N254AB">11. Certum eſt primò in hypotheſi, quæ componit continuum ex
                <lb/>
              punctis mathematicis vix poſſe explicari, ſiue dicantur eſſe infinita, vt
                <lb/>
              vult Galileus, ſiue finita vt alij volunt; </s>
              <s id="N254B3">quia nec idem punctum minoris
                <lb/>
              rotæ pluribus ſui plani reſpondet, nec ſingula ſingulis reſpondent, nec
                <lb/>
              etiam fiunt illi ſaltus intactis finitis, vel infinitis vacuolis; immò talis eſt
                <lb/>
              motus circularis natura, vt minimè concipi, nedum explicari poſſit iuxta
                <lb/>
              hypotheſim punctorum mathematicorum. </s>
            </p>
            <p id="N254BF" type="main">
              <s id="N254C1">12. Certum eſt ſecundò, vix etiam explicari poſſe iuxta hypotheſim
                <lb/>
              partium proportionalium infinitarum actu; </s>
              <s id="N254C7">quia contactus ipſe globi, &
                <lb/>
              plani tam obſcurè in hac hypotheſi explicatur, vt etiam authores ipſi,
                <lb/>
              qui huic ſententiæ patrocinantur, vltrò aſſerant inſeparabilem eſſe diffi­
                <lb/>
              cultatem; </s>
              <s id="N254D1">quod enim dicunt contactum fieri in parte indeterminata,
                <lb/>
              neſcio an aliquis ſi non blandiens capere poſſit: nunquid enim contactus
                <lb/>
              eſt determinatus qui realis eſt, & ſingularis, id eſt hic & non alius? </s>
              <s id="N254DB">nun­
                <lb/>
              quid eſt aliquid, quod tangit ab omni, eo quod tangit, diſtinctum? </s>
              <s id="N254E0">quip­
                <lb/>
              pe tangere, & non tangere ſunt prædicata contradictoria; ſed de his fusè
                <lb/>
              in Metaphyſica. </s>
            </p>
            <p id="N254E8" type="main">
              <s id="N254EA">13. Adde quod, licèt contactus globi in plano explicari poſſet, ſupe­
                <lb/>
              reſſet tamen eadem difficultas; nam cùm nulla ſit pars, ſiue indetermina­
                <lb/>
              ta, ſiue determinata in plano BF, quæ ſit intacta, & cum eadem pars
                <lb/>
              arcus BD non reſpondeat pluribus partibus plani BF, & cùm ſingu­
                <lb/>
              læ partes arcus ſingulis partibus non reſpondeant (quæ omnia
                <lb/>
              conſtant ex dictis) profectò eadem eſt difficultas iuxta hypotheſim par­
                <lb/>
              tium proportionalium infinitarum actu, quæ eſt iuxta hypotheſim pun­
                <lb/>
              ctorum mathematicorum finitorum, vel infinitorum. </s>
            </p>
            <p id="N254FE" type="main">
              <s id="N25500">14. His poſitis, ſupereſt tantùm vt ſoluatur hæc difficultas iuxta hy­
                <lb/>
              potheſim punctorum phyſicorum, vel partium diuiſibilium in infini­
                <lb/>
              tum potentiâ, cuius principia & difficultates in Metaphyſica diſcu­
                <lb/>
              tiemus. </s>
            </p>
            <p id="N25509" type="main">
              <s id="N2550B">Dico ergo ſatis facilè iuxta hanc hypotheſim explicari, & ſolui poſſe
                <lb/>
              nodum rotæ Ariſtotelicæ: </s>
              <s id="N25511">quippe punctum phyſicum curuum tangit
                <lb/>
              punctum phyſicum planum, ſed non adæquatè; </s>
              <s id="N25517">quippè nullum curuum
                <lb/>
              adæquari poteſt plano, ſeu cum plano conuenire, quod nemo Geometra
                <lb/>
              negare poterit: </s>
              <s id="N2551F">quippe duæ quantitates poſſunt duobus modis conſide­
                <lb/>
              rari: Primò in ordine ad æqualitatem, vel inæqualitatem. </s>
              <s id="N25525">Secundò, in
                <lb/>
              ordine ad commenſurationem, vel conuenientiam, vel
                <expan abbr="incommenſura-bilitatẽ">incommenſura­
                  <lb/>
                bilitatem</expan>
              ; </s>
              <s id="N25531">ſi primo modo, vna quantitas, vel dicitur alteri æqualis, vel inæ­
                <lb/>
              qualis; </s>
              <s id="N25537">ſi inæqualis, vel maior, vel minor; </s>
              <s id="N2553B">ſi maior vel minor, dicitur
                <lb/>
              rationalis, vel irrationalis ſeu aloga; ſed hæc ſunt vulgaria, paulò obſcu­
                <lb/>
              riora, quæ ſequuntur. </s>
            </p>
            <p id="N25543" type="main">
              <s id="N25545">15. Si enim ſecundo modo conſiderentur, vel poſſunt commenſurari,
                <lb/>
              vel non poſſunt; </s>
              <s id="N2554B">ſi primum, ſunt neceſſariò æquales; </s>
              <s id="N2554F">ſi inæquales illæ ſunt
                <lb/>
              vel alogæ eædem quæ ſuprà, ſic diagonalis
                <expan abbr="cõparata">comparata</expan>
              cum latere quadrati </s>
            </p>
          </chap>
        </body>
      </text>
    </archimedes>
Impressum