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
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
<
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
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>
<
pb
xlink:href
="
065/01/075.jpg
"
pagenum
="
69
"/>
paſſible, immortal,
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
&c.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
they muſt needs be abſolutely perfect; and
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg178
"/>
<
lb
/>
their being abſolute perfect, neceſſarily implies that there is in them
<
lb
/>
all kinds of perfection; and conſequently, that their figure be alſo
<
lb
/>
perfect, that is to ſay, ſpherical; and abſolutely and perfectly
<
lb
/>
ſpherical, and not rough and irregular.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg178
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Perfect ſphericity
<
lb
/>
why aſcribed to
<
lb
/>
Cœlestial bodies,
<
lb
/>
by the
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
ticks.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>And this incorruptibility, from whence do you prove
<
lb
/>
it?</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMPL. </
s
>
<
s
>Immediately by its freedom from contraries, and
<
lb
/>
diately, by its ſimple circular motion.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>So that; by what I gather from your diſcourſe, in
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg179
"/>
<
lb
/>
king the eſſence of the Cœleſtial bodies to be incorruptible,
<
lb
/>
terable,
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
&c,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
there is no need of rotundity as a cauſe, or
<
lb
/>
ſite; for if this ſhould cauſe inalterability, we might at our
<
lb
/>
ſure make wood, wax, and other Elementary matters,
<
lb
/>
tible, by reducing them to a ſpherical figure.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg179
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
The Figure is not
<
lb
/>
the cauſe of
<
lb
/>
ruptibility, but of
<
lb
/>
longer duration.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMPL. </
s
>
<
s
>And is it not manifeſt that a ball of Wood will better
<
lb
/>
and longer be preferved, than an oblong, or other angular
<
lb
/>
gure, made of a like quantity of the ſame wood.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>This is moſt certain, but yet it doth not of corruptible
<
lb
/>
become incorruptible, but ſtill remains corruptible, though of a
<
lb
/>
much longer duration. </
s
>
<
s
>Therefore you muſt note, that a thing
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg180
"/>
<
lb
/>
ruptible, is capable of being more or leſſe ſuch, and we may
<
lb
/>
properly ſay this is leſſe corruptible than that; as for example, the
<
lb
/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Jaſper,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
than the
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Pietra Sirena
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
; but incorruptibility admits not
<
lb
/>
of more, or leſſe, ſo as that it may be ſaid this is more
<
lb
/>
ble than that, if both be incorruptible and eternal. </
s
>
<
s
>The
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg181
"/>
<
lb
/>
ſity of figure therefore cannot operate: ſave onely in matters
<
lb
/>
pable of more or leſſe duration; but in the eternal, which
<
lb
/>
not be other than equally eternal, the operation of figure ceaſeth.
<
lb
/>
</
s
>
<
s
>And therefore, ſince the Cœleſtial matter is not incorruptible by
<
lb
/>
figure, but otherwayes no man needs to be ſo ſolicitous for this
<
lb
/>
perfect ſphericity; for if the matter be incorruptible, let it have
<
lb
/>
what figure it will, it ſhall be alwayes ſuch.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg180
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Corruptibility
<
lb
/>
mits of more or
<
lb
/>
leſſe; ſo doth noe
<
lb
/>
incorruptibiliiy.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg181
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
The perfection of
<
lb
/>
figure, operateth
<
lb
/>
in corruptible
<
lb
/>
dies, but not in the
<
lb
/>
eternal.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SAGR. </
s
>
<
s
>But I am conſidering another thing, and ſay, that if
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg182
"/>
<
lb
/>
we ſhould grant the ſpherical figure a faculty of conferring
<
lb
/>
ruptibility, all bodies of whatſoever figure, would be
<
lb
/>
ble; foraſmuch as if the rotund body be incorruptible,
<
lb
/>
bility would then ſubſiſt in thoſe parts which alter the perfect
<
lb
/>
tundity; as for inſtance, there is in a
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Die
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
a body perfectly round,
<
lb
/>
and, as ſuch, incorruptible; therefore it remaineth that thoſe
<
lb
/>
gles be corruptible which cover and hide the rotundity; ſo that
<
lb
/>
the moſt that could happen, would be, that thoſe angles, and
<
lb
/>
(to ſo ſpeak) excreſcencies, would corrupt. </
s
>
<
s
>But if we proceed to a
<
lb
/>
more inward conſideration, that in thoſe parts alſo towards the
<
lb
/>
angles, there are compriſed other leſſer bals of the ſame matter; </
s
>
</
p
>
</
chap
>
</
body
>
</
text
>
</
archimedes
>