FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   >>  
on us by the reflection of the Sunne-beames from the superficies of her body, or else by her owne illumination. Some there are who affirme this latter part. So _Averroes_, _Caelius Rhodiginus_, _Iulius Caesar_, _&c._ and their reason is because this light is discerned in many places,[1] whereas those bodies which give light by reflexion can there onely be perceived where the angle of reflexion is equall to the angle of incidence, and this is onely in one place, as in a looking-glasse those beames which are reflected from it cannot bee perceived in every place where you may see the glasse, but onely there where your eye is placed on the same line whereon the beames are reflected. [Sidenote 1: _De coelo. l. 2. com. 49._ _Ant. lection. l. 20. c. 4._ _De phaenom. lunae. c. 11._] But to this I answere, that the argument will not hold of such bodies, whose superficies is full of unequall parts and gibbosities as the Moone is. Wherefore it is as well the more probable as the more common opinion, that her light proceedes from both these causes, from reflexion and illumination; nor doth it herein differ from our earth, since that also hath some light by illumination: for how otherwise would the parts about us in a Sunne-shine day appeare so bright, when as all the rayes of reflexion cannot enter into our eye? 2. It is compact, and not a spungie and porous substance.[1] But this is denied by _Diogenes_, _Vitellio_, and _Reinoldus_, and some others, who held the Moone to bee of the same kind of nature as a Pumice-stone, and this, say they, is the reason why in the Suns eclipses there appeares within her a duskish ruddy colour, because the Sunne-beames being refracted in passing through the pores of her body, must necessarily be represented under such a colour. [Sidenote 1: _Plut. de pla. phil. l. 2. c. 13._ _Opt. l. 4._ _Com. Purbac. Theo. p. 164._] But I reply, if this be the cause of her rednesse; then why doth she not appeare under the same forme when she is about a sextile aspect, and the darkned part of her body is discernable? for then also doe the same rayes passe through her, and therefore in all likelihood should produce the same effect, and notwithstanding those beames are then diverted from us, that they cannot enter into our eyes by a streight line, yet must the colour still remaine visible in her body,[1] and besides according to this opinion, the spots would not alwaies be the same, but divers,
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   >>  



Top keywords:

beames

 

reflexion

 
illumination
 

colour

 

Sidenote

 

appeare

 

opinion

 
bodies
 

perceived

 

reason


superficies

 

reflected

 

glasse

 
substance
 
remaine
 

streight

 

duskish

 
appeares
 

visible

 

eclipses


nature
 

alwaies

 
divers
 

Vitellio

 

denied

 

Diogenes

 

Reinoldus

 

rednesse

 

diverted

 
Pumice

sextile

 

Purbac

 

darkned

 
aspect
 

discernable

 
passing
 
refracted
 

effect

 

produce

 
represented

likelihood

 
necessarily
 
notwithstanding
 

Wherefore

 

incidence

 

equall

 

whereon

 
places
 
affirme
 

reflection