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

< >
[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.]
[61. PROP. VII. Tis probable that the Sun is in the Gentre of the World.]
[62. PROP. VIII. That there is not any ſufficient reaſon to prove the Earth incapable of thoſe mo-tions which Copernicus aſcribes un-to it.]
[63. Provebimur portu, terræque, verbeſq; recedunt.]
[64. PROP. IX. That it is more probable the Earth does move, than the Sun or Heavens.]
[65. PROP. X. That this Hypotheſis is exactly agreeable to common appearances.]
[66. Quicunq; ſolam mente præcipiti petit]
[67. Brevem replere non valentis ambitum, # Pudebit aucti nominis.]
[68. FINIS.]
< >
page |< < (65) of 370 > >|
That the Moon may be a World.
    <echo version="1.0RC">
      <text xml:lang="en" type="free">
        <div type="section" level="1" n="35">
          <p>
            <s 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:space="preserve"/>
          </p>
          <div type="float" level="2" n="4">
            <note position="left" xlink:label="note-0076-02" xlink:href="note-0076-02a" xml:space="preserve">Foſephus
              <lb/>
            l. 2. com.
              <lb/>
            App. Au-
              <lb/>
            guſte de ci-
              <lb/>
            vit. Dei.
              <lb/>
            l. 18. c. 41.</note>
            <note position="left" xlink:label="note-0076-03" xlink:href="note-0076-03a" xml:space="preserve">Nat. Hiſt.
              <lb/>
            l. 2. c. 9.</note>
          </div>
          <p>
            <s xml:space="preserve">Vitellio and Reinoldus, Affirm the Spots to
              <lb/>
              <anchor type="note" xlink:label="note-0077-01a" xlink:href="note-0077-01"/>
            be the Thicker parts of the Moon, into which
              <lb/>
            the Sun cannot Infuſe much Light; </s>
            <s 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: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/>
              <anchor type="note" xlink:label="note-0077-02a" xlink:href="note-0077-02"/>
            ‘ cies, but the Subſtance alſo, and there ſhe
              <lb/>
            ‘ ſeems ſpotted, where her Body is moſt Opa-
              <lb/>
            cous. </s>
            <s 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: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:space="preserve"/>
          </p>
          <div type="float" level="2" n="5">
            <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>
            <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>
          </div>
          <p>
            <s 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: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: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:space="preserve">for ſince that is neareſt to thoſe lower Bo-</s>
          </p>
        </div>
      </text>
    </echo>