Salusbury, Thomas, Mathematical collections and translations (Tome I), 1667

List of thumbnails

< >
201
201 		202
202
203
203 		204
204
205
205 		206
206
207
207 		208
208
209
209 		210
210
< >
page |< < of 701 > >|
    <archimedes>
      <text>
        <body>
          <chap>
            <p type="main">
              <s>
                <pb xlink:href="040/01/284.jpg" pagenum="264"/>
              And firſt, I ask you, whether the Aſtronomers, in obſerving with
                <lb/>
              their Inſtruments, and ſeeking
                <emph type="italics"/>
              v. </s>
              <s>gr.
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              how great the elevation of a
                <lb/>
              Star is above the Horizon, may deviate from the truth, aſwell in
                <lb/>
              making it too great, as too little; that is, may erroneouſly
                <lb/>
              pute, that it is ſometime higher than the truth, and ſometimes
                <lb/>
              er; or elſe whether the errour muſt needs be alwayes of one
                <lb/>
              kinde, to wit, that erring they alwayes make it too much, and
                <lb/>
              ver too little, or alwayes too little, and never too much?</s>
            </p>
            <p type="main">
              <s>SIMP. </s>
              <s>I doubt not, but that it is as eaſie to commit an errour
                <lb/>
              the one way, as the other.</s>
            </p>
            <p type="main">
              <s>SALV. </s>
              <s>I believe the Author would anſwer the ſame. </s>
              <s>Now of
                <lb/>
              theſe two kinds of errours, which are contraries, and into which the
                <lb/>
              obſervators of the new ſtar may equally have fallen, applied to
                <lb/>
              calculations, one ſort will make the ſtar higher, and the other lower
                <lb/>
              than really it is. </s>
              <s>And becauſe we have already agreed, that all
                <lb/>
              the obſervations are falſe; upon what ground would this
                <lb/>
              thor have us to accept thoſe for moſt congruous with the truth,
                <lb/>
              that ſhew the ſtar to have been near at hand, than the others that
                <lb/>
              ſhew it exceſſively remote?</s>
            </p>
            <p type="main">
              <s>SIMP. </s>
              <s>By what I have, as yet, collected of the Authors mind,
                <lb/>
              I ſee not that he doth refuſe thoſe obſervations, and indagations
                <lb/>
              that might make the ſtar more remote than the Moon, and alſo
                <lb/>
              than the Sun, but only thoſe that make it remote (as you your ſelf
                <lb/>
              have ſaid) more than an infinite diſtance; the which diſtance,
                <lb/>
              cauſe you alſo do refuſe it as impoſſible, he alſo paſſeth over, as
                <lb/>
              being convicted of infinite falſhood; as alſo thoſe obſervations
                <lb/>
              are of impoſſibility. </s>
              <s>Methinks, therefore, that if you would
                <lb/>
              vince the Author, you ought to produce ſupputations, more exact,
                <lb/>
              or more in number, or of more diligent obſervers, which conſtitute
                <lb/>
              the ſtar in ſuch and ſuch a diſtance above the Moon, or above the
                <lb/>
              Sun, and to be brief, in a place poſſible for it to be in, like as he
                <lb/>
              produceth theſe twelve, which all place the ſtar beneath the Moon
                <lb/>
              in places that have a being in the world, and where it is poſſible for
                <lb/>
              it to be.</s>
            </p>
            <p type="main">
              <s>SALV. </s>
              <s>But
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Simplicius
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              yours and the Authors Equivocation
                <lb/>
              lyeth in this, yours in one reſpect, and the Authors in another; I
                <lb/>
              diſcover by your ſpeech that you have formed a conceit to your
                <lb/>
              ſelf, that the exorbitancies that are commited in the eſtabliſhing
                <lb/>
              the diſtance of the Star do encreaſe ſucceſſively, according to the
                <lb/>
              proportion of the errors that are made by the Inſtrument, in
                <lb/>
              ing the obſervations, and that by converſion, from the greatneſs
                <lb/>
              of the exorbitancies, may be argued the greatneſſe of the error;
                <lb/>
              and that thereforefore hearing it to be infered from ſuch an
                <lb/>
              vation, that the diſtance of the ſtar is infinite, it is neceſſary, that
                <lb/>
              the errour in obſerving was infinite, and therefore not to be </s>
            </p>
          </chap>
        </body>
      </text>
    </archimedes>
Impressum