Wilkins, John, A discovery of a new world : or a discourse tending to prove, that 'tis probable there may be another Habitable World in the Moon ; with a discourse concerning the Probability of a Passage thither; unto which is added, a discourse concerning a New Planet, tending to prove, that 'tis probable our earth is one of the Planets

Table of contents

< >
[31.] Necnon Oceano paſci phæbumque polumq; Gredimus.
[32.] PROP. IV. That the Moon is a Solid, Compacted, Opacous Body.
[33.] PROP. V. That the Moon hath not any Light of her own.
[34.] PROP. VI. That there is a World in the Moon, bath been the direct Opinion of many Ancient, with ſome Modern Mathematicians, and may probably de deduc’d from the Tenents of others.
[35.] PROP. VII. That thoſe Spots and brighter parts, which by our ſight may be diſtinguiſhed in the Moon, do ſhew the difference betwixt the Sea and Land, in that other World.
[36.] PROP. VIII. The Spots repeſent the Sea, and the brighter parts the Land.
[37.] PROP. IX. That there are high Mountains, deep Vallies, and ſpacious Plains in the Body of the Moon.
[38.] PROP. X. That there is an Atmo-ſphæra, or an Orb of groſs, Vaporous Air, immediately encompaſſing the body of the Moon.
[39.] PROP. XI. That as their World is our Moon, ſo our World is their Moon.
[40.] Provehimur portu, terræque urbeſque recedunt.
[41.] PROP. XII.
[42.] PROP. XIII.
[43.] PROP. XIV.
[44.] FINIS.
[45.] A DISCOURSE Concerning a Rem Planet. Tending to prove That ’tis probable our EARTH is one of the PLANETS. The Second Book. By John Wilkins, late L. Biſhop of Cheſter.
[46.] LONDON: Printed by J. D. for John Gellibrand, at the Golden Ball in St. Paul’s Church-Yard. M.DC.LXXXIV.
[47.] To the Reader.
[48.] PROP. I.
[49.] PROP. II.
[50.] PROP. III.
[51.] PROP. IV.
[52.] PROP. V.
[53.] PROP. VI.
[54.] PROP. VII. PROP. VIII. PROP. IX. PROP. X.
[55.] That the EARTH May be a PLANET. PROP. I.
[56.] PROP. II.
[57.] PROP. III.
[58.] PROP. IV.
[59.] PROP. V. That the Scripture, in its proper conſtru-ction, does not any where affirm the Immobility of the Earth.
[60.] PROP. VI. That there is not any Argument from the Words of Scripture, Principles of Na-ture, or Obſervations in Aſtronomy, which can ſuſſiciently evidence the Earth to be in the Gentre of the Uni-verſe.
< >
page |< < (65) of 370 > >|
    <echo version="1.0RC">
      <text xml:lang="en" type="free">
        <div xml:id="echoid-div98" type="section" level="1" n="35">
          <p>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s998" xml:space="preserve">
              <pb o="65" file="0077" n="77" rhead="That the Moon may be a World."/>
            commonly ſee refuted in the Gommentators on
              <lb/>
            the Books de Gælo.</s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s999" xml:space="preserve"/>
          </p>
          <p>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1000" xml:space="preserve">Vitellio and Reinoldus, Affirm the Spots to
              <lb/>
              <note position="right" xlink:label="note-0077-01" xlink:href="note-0077-01a" xml:space="preserve">Opt. lib. 9.
                <lb/>
              comment.
                <lb/>
              in Pnrb.
                <lb/>
              pag. 164.</note>
            be the Thicker parts of the Moon, into which
              <lb/>
            the Sun cannot Infuſe much Light; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1001" xml:space="preserve">and this
              <lb/>
            (ſay they) is the Reaſon why in theSuns Eclip-
              <lb/>
            ſes, the Spots and Brighter parts, are ſtill in ſome
              <lb/>
            meaſure Diſtinguiſhed, becauſe the Sun Beams
              <lb/>
            are not able ſo well to Penetrate through thoſe
              <lb/>
            Thicker, as they may through the Thinner
              <lb/>
            parts of that Planet. </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1002" xml:space="preserve">Of this Opinion alſo was
              <lb/>
            Gæſar la GaHa, whoſe Words are theſe, The
              <lb/>
            ‘ Moon doth there appear Cleareſt, where ſhe
              <lb/>
            ‘ is Tranſpicious, not only through the Superfi-
              <lb/>
              <note position="right" xlink:label="note-0077-02" xlink:href="note-0077-02a" xml:space="preserve">Ex'qua par-
                <lb/>
              te luna eſt
                <lb/>
              tranſpicua
                <lb/>
              non ſolum
                <lb/>
              ſecundum
                <lb/>
              ſuperficiem
                <lb/>
              ſed etiam
                <lb/>
              ſecundum
                <lb/>
              ſubſtantiam
                <lb/>
              eatenus cla-
                <lb/>
              ra, ex qna
                <lb/>
              autem parte
                <lb/>
              opaca eſt
                <lb/>
              eatenus ob-
                <lb/>
              ſcura vide-
                <lb/>
              tur. De Phæ-
                <lb/>
              nom. eap. II.
                <lb/>
              Albert.
                <lb/>
              mag. de
                <lb/>
              Coævis
                <lb/>
              Q. 4. Art.
                <lb/>
              12.
                <lb/>
              Colleg. Con.</note>
            ‘ cies, but the Subſtance alſo, and there ſhe
              <lb/>
            ‘ ſeems ſpotted, where her Body is moſt Opa-
              <lb/>
            cous. </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1003" xml:space="preserve">The ground of this his Aſſertion, was,
              <lb/>
            becauſe he thought the Moon did receive and
              <lb/>
            beſtow her Light by Illumination only, and not
              <lb/>
            at all by reſlexion; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1004" xml:space="preserve">but this, together with the
              <lb/>
            ſuppoſed Penetration of the Sun-Beams, and
              <lb/>
            the Perſpicuity of the Moons Body, I have
              <lb/>
            above Anſwered and Refuted.</s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1005" xml:space="preserve"/>
          </p>
          <p>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1006" xml:space="preserve">The more Common and general Opinion, is,
              <lb/>
            that the Spots are the Thinner parts of the
              <lb/>
            Moon, which are leſs able to reflect the Beams
              <lb/>
            that they receive from the Sun, and this is moſt
              <lb/>
            agreeable to reaſon; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1007" xml:space="preserve">for if the Stars are there-
              <lb/>
            fore brighteſt, becauſe they are Thicker, and
              <lb/>
            more Solid than their Orbs, then it will follow,
              <lb/>
            that thoſe parts of the Moon which have leſs
              <lb/>
            Light, have alſo leſs Thickneſs. </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1008" xml:space="preserve">It was the
              <lb/>
            Providence of Nature (ſay ſome) that ſo con-
              <lb/>
            trived that Planet to have theſe Spots within
              <lb/>
            it; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1009" xml:space="preserve">for ſince that is neareſt to thoſe lower </s>
          </p>
        </div>
      </text>
    </echo>