Fabri, Honoré, Dialogi physici in quibus de motu terrae disputatur, 1665

Page concordance

< >
Scan Original
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
< >
page |< < of 248 > >|
    <archimedes>
      <text>
        <body>
          <chap>
            <p type="main">
              <s id="s.000799">
                <pb pagenum="71" xlink:href="025/01/075.jpg"/>
              rem hanc opinionem deſcendit, eò quòd putarer, æqualitatem realium
                <lb/>
              motuum ſalvari non poſſe, niſi in hypotheſi Copernicana, in qua
                <lb/>
              ſcilicet ſpectantis hominis oculus extra orbitarum cœleſtium centrum
                <lb/>
              collocatur. </s>
            </p>
            <p type="main">
              <s id="s.000800">
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Auguſtin.
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              </s>
              <s id="s.000801"> Scio, quem intelligas, Chryſocome, rationes illæ de­
                <lb/>
              biliſſimæ ſunt, & eadem facilitate deſtruuntur, qua adſtruuntur; præ­
                <lb/>
              ſertim in hypotheſi hujus noſtri Antimi, in qua, motus realis vnicus
                <lb/>
              ſimplex & æquabilis eſt ab ortu in occaſum; reliqui tantùm apparentes,
                <lb/>
              hos quidem inæquales eſſe do vltrò, ſecus tamen realem & phyſicum,
                <lb/>
              qui ſanè ita æqualis eſt, vt æqualibus temporibus, æqualia ſpatia in ſuis
                <lb/>
              ſpiris ſeu revolutionibus Planeta decurrat. </s>
            </p>
            <p type="main">
              <s id="s.000802">
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Antim.
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              </s>
              <s id="s.000803"> Non eſt etiam, quod aliquis timeat, ne præſata æqualitas hy­
                <lb/>
              potheſi Copernicanæ ſuffragetur; ex illa enim potiſſimum contra iſtam
                <lb/>
              argumentum duci poteſt, vt paulò poſt evincam. </s>
            </p>
            <p type="main">
              <s id="s.000804">
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Auguſtin.
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              </s>
              <s id="s.000805"> Vnum omiſeram, quod ſcilicet in Luna maximè rea­
                <lb/>
              lium motuum inæqualitas ponenda eſſet, quia ſcilicet Menſes tum Sy­
                <lb/>
              nodici, tum Periodici inter ſe inæquales ſunt; at etiam in mea hypothe­
                <lb/>
              ſi, Luna ſpectatur ex eo centro, circa quod ſuos orbes agit; igitur ideò
                <lb/>
              æqualitas abigenda non eſt, quod in hypotheſi terræ mobilis, ſal­
                <lb/>
              vari tantùm poſſit; cùm & in alia hypotheſi fortè ſalvetur, & in illa,
                <lb/>
              Lunæ motus quamvis ex ſuo centro ſpectati, valde inæquales appa­
                <lb/>
              reant. </s>
            </p>
            <p type="main">
              <s id="s.000806">
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Antim.
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              </s>
              <s id="s.000807"> Ne dicas,
                <emph type="italics"/>
              fortè ſalvetur,
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              dele illud
                <emph type="italics"/>
              fortè
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              ; quia profectò æqua­
                <lb/>
              litatem illam optimè & facilè ſalvo; vt probè, ni fallor, intelligis ex iis,
                <lb/>
              quæ in proximo congreſſu de meo Solis ſyſtemate obiter expoſui. </s>
            </p>
            <p type="main">
              <s id="s.000808">
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Auguſtin.
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              </s>
              <s id="s.000809"> De Sole non abnuerim, ſed de Luna quid? </s>
              <s id="s.000810">In qua non­
                <lb/>
              nulli ex tuis, etiam in tua hypotheſi, motuum realium inæqualitatem
                <lb/>
              admittunt, propter vnam dumtaxat inæqualitatem menſium; nempe li­
                <lb/>
              cèt motus inæqualitas in hoc, vel illo arcu orbitæ in meram apparen­
                <lb/>
              tiam, ſalva ſemper æqualitate reali, refundi poſſit, ſi tamen brevior ſit
                <lb/>
              vna integra revolutio, quàm alia, realis profectò erit, non verò apparens
                <lb/>
              inæqualitas, ſed hoc non vrgeo contra te, quia eadem vterque difficultate
                <lb/>
              laboramus. </s>
            </p>
            <p type="main">
              <s id="s.000811">
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Antim.
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              </s>
              <s id="s.000812"> Nullo negotio præfatam menſium inæqualitatem in mea hy­
                <lb/>
              potheſi explico; Cùm Lunæ æquè ac Soli motum ſimpliciſſimum attri­
                <lb/>
              buam ab ortu ad occaſum, cum gemina illa inclinatione, de qua ſupra,
                <lb/>
              & hac vna ſingulari differentia, quòd terminus ſecundæ inclinationis in
                <lb/>
              Sole ſit Æquator, in Luna verò ſit Ecliptica; longioris operæ res eſſet, iſta
                <lb/>
              fuſiùs proſequi, præſertim cùm appellata menſium inæqualitas alioquin
                <lb/>
              facilè in hac mea hypotheſi intelligatur: fac enim, v. g. Solem eſſe cir­
                <lb/>
              ca Apogæum, Lunæ conjunctum; Sol tardiùs ſuos orbes diurnos ab­
                <lb/>
              ſolvit: igitur breviore intervallo Lunam poſt ſe relinquit versùs or­
                <lb/>
              tum; vnde neceſſariò ſequitur, copulam deinde tardiùs fieri; vnde
                <lb/>
              menſem illum periodicum longiorem eſſe, neceſſe eſt; contra verò
                <lb/>
              breviorem illum, qui Sole in perigæo exiſtente currit; quod verò </s>
            </p>
          </chap>
        </body>
      </text>
    </archimedes>
Impressum