728364
De
[Translation: On ]
[Translation: On ]
Seing that any finite line will
subtend an angle at summe distance;
as let subtend the the angle
Then a line double to , which let be
, will subtend the same angle at a
double distance, so that will be
aequall to
subtend an angle at summe distance;
as let subtend the the angle
Then a line double to , which let be
, will subtend the same angle at a
double distance, so that will be
aequall to
In those subtensions I understand that the poynt be in a
perpendicular line to the
middle of the subtendent as also in all the others which
middle of the subtendent as also in all the others which
Now I suppose to be removed to a further distance from the poynt .
Then the angle subtended must be lesse than And .
shall [???] subtend the same angle at a double distance as
Then the angle subtended must be lesse than And .
shall [???] subtend the same angle at a double distance as
And this is true generally continually that the is removed
the lesse angle it subtendeth & always must subtend the same
angle at a double
the lesse angle it subtendeth & always must subtend the same
angle at a double
Then I suppose to be removed to an infinite distance; at which
distance the supposition altereth not the quantity of . but quantity consequence
is of the Which wilbe, that the angle wh then subtended [???] to be
of an infinite quantity in litleness in respecte of the former Yet it
cannot be sayd to be no angle negatively because it is positive. & it
must also follow that the line must subtend the same positive angle
at a double Which is Double to the former infinite
distance the supposition altereth not the quantity of . but quantity consequence
is of the Which wilbe, that the angle wh then subtended [???] to be
of an infinite quantity in litleness in respecte of the former Yet it
cannot be sayd to be no angle negatively because it is positive. & it
must also follow that the line must subtend the same positive angle
at a double Which is Double to the former infinite
Also, let the distance of the subtendents be nearer [???]to [???]it cannot be
otherwise inferred but that the lines & being infinit though infinite,
be ad diversas partes, & in diversis locis, because & are betweene them,
& have agreement or concurrence but only in the poynt [???] or in no distance
out of the poynt
otherwise inferred but that the lines & being infinit though infinite,
be ad diversas partes, & in diversis locis, because & are betweene them,
& have agreement or concurrence but only in the poynt [???] or in no distance
out of the poynt
And yet the nearness of there congruence &concurrence in all other partes
[???] at the utmost is such, that although they be remote; the angle
is of no proportion explicable by nomber finite, but [¿]unknown[?], to any
angles other angle which we call The like inexplicable proportion
is of the subtendent lines & , to there infinite distance position from
And yet the sayd lines & . as also that infinite litle or improportio-
nable angle is divisible still in infinitum. & still, although improportionable
yet in an other respect, that is to say of his owne partes, is
[???] at the utmost is such, that although they be remote; the angle
is of no proportion explicable by nomber finite, but [¿]unknown[?], to any
angles other angle which we call The like inexplicable proportion
is of the subtendent lines & , to there infinite distance position from
And yet the sayd lines & . as also that infinite litle or improportio-
nable angle is divisible still in infinitum. & still, although improportionable
yet in an other respect, that is to say of his owne partes, is
zoom in
zoom out
zoom area
full page
page width
set mark
remove mark
get reference
digilib