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
="
040/01/201.jpg
"
pagenum
="
183
"/>
But the curve-line A C B, is greater than the two right-lines A C,
<
lb
/>
and C B; therefore,
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
à fortiori,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
the curve-line A C B, is much
<
lb
/>
greater than the right line A B, which was to be
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg372
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg371
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
The
<
lb
/>
tion of a
<
lb
/>
tick, to prove the
<
lb
/>
right line to be the
<
lb
/>
ſhorteſt of all lines.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg372
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
The Paralogiſm
<
lb
/>
of the ſame
<
lb
/>
tetick, which
<
lb
/>
veth
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
ignotum per
<
lb
/>
ignotius.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>I do not think that if one ſhould ranſack all the
<
lb
/>
logiſms of the world, there could be found one more commodious
<
lb
/>
than this, to give an example of the moſt ſolemn fallacy of all
<
lb
/>
fallacies, namely, than that which proveth
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
ignotum per ignotius.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMP. </
s
>
<
s
>How ſo?</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>Do you ask me how ſo? </
s
>
<
s
>The unknown concluſion
<
lb
/>
which you deſire to prove, is it not, that the curved line A C B, is
<
lb
/>
longer than the right line A B; the middle term which is taken
<
lb
/>
for known, is that the curve-line A C B, is greater than the two
<
lb
/>
lines A C and C B, the which are known to be greater than A B;
<
lb
/>
And if it be unknown whether the curve-line be greater than the
<
lb
/>
ſingle right-line A B, ſhall it not be much more unknown whether
<
lb
/>
it be greater than the two right lines A C & C B, which are known
<
lb
/>
to be greater than the ſole line A B, & yet you aſſume it as known?</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMP. </
s
>
<
s
>I do not yet very well perceive wherein lyeth the
<
lb
/>
lacy.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>As the two right lines are greater than A B, (as may be
<
lb
/>
known by
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Euclid
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
) and in as much as the curve line is longer than
<
lb
/>
the two right lines A C and B C, ſhall it not not be much greater
<
lb
/>
than the ſole right line A B?</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMP. </
s
>
<
s
>It ſhall ſo.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>That the curve-line A C B, is greater than the right
<
lb
/>
line A B, is the concluſion more known than the middle term,
<
lb
/>
which is, that the ſame curve-line is greater than the two
<
lb
/>
lines A C and C B. </
s
>
<
s
>Now when the middle term is leſs known
<
lb
/>
than the concluſion, it is called a proving
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
ignotum per ignotius.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
But to return to our purpoſe, it is ſufficient that you know the
<
lb
/>
right line to be the ſhorteſt of all the lines that can be drawn
<
lb
/>
tween two points. </
s
>
<
s
>And as to the principal concluſion, you ſay,
<
lb
/>
that the material ſphere doth not touch the ſphere in one ſole
<
lb
/>
point. </
s
>
<
s
>What then is its contact?</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMP. </
s
>
<
s
>It ſhall be a part of its ſuperficies.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>And the contact likewiſe of another ſphere equal to the
<
lb
/>
firſt, ſhall be alſo a like particle of its ſuperficies?</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMP. </
s
>
<
s
>There is no reaſon vvhy it ſhould be othervviſe.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SALV. </
s
>
<
s
>Then the tvvo ſpheres vvhich touch each other, ſhall
<
lb
/>
touch vvith the tvvo ſame particles of a ſuperficies, for each of them
<
lb
/>
agreeing to one and the ſame plane, they muſt of neceſſity agree
<
lb
/>
in like manner to each other. </
s
>
<
s
>Imagine now that the two ſpheres </
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg373
"/>
<
lb
/>
[
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
in Fig.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
6.] whoſe centres are A and B, do touch one another:
<
lb
/>
and let their centres be conjoyned by the right line A B, which
<
lb
/>
paſſeth through the contact. </
s
>
<
s
>It paſſeth thorow the point C, and </
s
>
</
p
>
</
chap
>
</
body
>
</
text
>
</
archimedes
>