This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
in English
r
Because you desire speed I'l answer your letter th
brevity I can. In eerthe
diameters of ee
tob be half a minute. fflamsteed & Cassini have of late observed
it to be but about 10″, & thus e
or in a rounder number 20000 diameters of e
assumption will do well & I think it not worth r
to alter your numbers.
In er
positions founded upon e
seems very evident supposing you take attraction so generally as
by it to understand any force by ch
to come together th
The second seems not so clear. ffor it may be said that
there might be other systemes of worlds before the present ones &
others before those & so on to all past eternity & by consequence te
ed that old systems
or that this system had not i it's originall from e
of former decaying systems but from a chaos of matter eavenly
dispersed throughout all space. ffor something of this kind I think
you say was ere
systems out of old ones the
seems to me apparently absurd.
The last
well. Tis unconceivable that inanimate brute matter should (with
out ech
upon & affect other matter th
if gravitation in the sense of Epicurus be essential & inherent
in it. And this is one reason why I desired you would not ascribe t
distance through a vacuum th
by & through chthey may convey their action or force
to another is to me so great an absurdity that I beleived no man
who has in philosophical matters any competent
ing can ever fall into it. Gravity must be caused by an agent
material or immaterial is a question I have left to e
of my readers.
Your fourth assertion te
gravity alone you conflude confirm by three argutht
your first Argut
many ancient Philosophers & others
allowed that there may be worlds & parcels of matter innumerab
or infinite, you deny this by representing it as absurd as that there
should be positively an infinite arithmetical summ or number ch
absurd. Neither do you prove that what men mean by an
infinite summ or number is a contradiction in nature. ffor a con
trad
of speech. Those things ch
contradictious phrases may be sometimes really in nature th
any contradiction at all. A silver inkhorn a paper Lanthorn
an iron whetstone are absurd phrases & e
thereby are really in nature. If any man should say that a
number & a summ (to speak properly) is that ch
bered & summed; but things infinite are numberless for (as we usu
ally speak) innumerable
ought not to be called a number or summ: he will speak pro
perly enough & your argument against him will I fear lose
its force. And yet if any man shall take e
summ in a larger sense so as to understand thereby things ch
the proper way of speaking are numberless & sumless (as you do
when you seem to allow an infinite number of points in a line)
I could readily allow him ee
an innumerable number or summless summ th
phrases. However if by this or any other argut
proved ee
would fall down from ee
the matter in falling might concrete into many e
dies of e
acquire an obliquity of descent by means of ch
not upon the great central body by
compass about it & then ascend again by e
motion and velocity thche
manner that Comets revolve about e
in concentrick orbs about e
alone.
And tho all e
& every system by a divine power constituted like rs
outward systemes descend towards et
could not always subsist th
is rt
As for e
all the Planets being let fall & descending th
gravities (as Gallileo supposes) wo
Orbs acquire their several velocities thch
in them. e
wards the Sun to be of such a quantity as it really is & that
the motions of the Planets are are turned upwards, every Pla
net will ascend to twice its height from e
ascend till he be twice as high from er
& no higher. Iupiter will ascend as high again as at r
is, a little above e
his present height, that is to ee
And then by falling down again from ech
ascended they will arrive again at their several orbs th
same velocities they had at first & thch
But if so soon as their motions by ch
turned upwards, thech
they will now ascend perpetually & all of them at
distances from the sun
arrives at e
& Venus when they arrive at ee
as swift as ee
them to ascend at once & ascend in the same line they will
constantly in ascending becom
their motions will constantly approach to an equality & become
at length slower then
that they ascended till they were almost contiguous & their
motions inconsiderably little & that all their motions were at
the same moment of time turned back again or (ch
most to e
motions & let fall at that time: they would all at once
arrive at their several orbs each the
at first; & if their motions were then turned sideways & at e
same time the gravitating power of e
might be strong enough to retain them in their Orbs, they
would revolve in them as before their ascent. But if the gravi
tating power of e
Orbs into the highest heavens in Parabolical lines. These things follow from my
Princip. Math. lib. 1. Prop. 33, 34, 36, 37. I thank urr
rest.
r
Is. Newton.
For Mr Bently at the
Palace in
Worcester
th Lett. from Mr Newton