them then I have expressed.[1] Non est impossibile cœcos ductus diaphani & perspicui corporis, sed opacâ superficie protendi, usque in diaphanam aliquam ex profundo in superficiem, emergentem partem, per quos ductus lumen longo postmodum interstitio erumpat, &c. But I reply, if the superficies betwixt these two enlightened parts remaine darke because of its opacity, then would it alwaies be darke, and the Sunne could not make it partake of light more then it could of perspicuity: But this contradicts all experience as you may see in Galilæus, who affirmes that when the Sunne comes nearer to his opposition, then that which is betwixt them, both is enlightned as well as either. Nay this opposes his owne eye-witnesse, for he confesses himselfe that he saw this by the glasse. He had said before that he came to see those strange sights discovered by Galilæus his glasse with an intent of contradiction, and you
- ↑ Cap. 11.
