Salusbury, Thomas
,
Mathematical collections and translations (Tome I)
,
1667
Text
Text Image
Image
XML
Thumbnail overview
Document information
None
Concordance
Figures
Thumbnails
page
|<
<
of 701
>
>|
<
archimedes
>
<
text
>
<
body
>
<
chap
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>
<
pb
xlink:href
="
040/01/085.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
>