I will not omit another reason, founded also upon Experience, and if I deceive not my self, manifestly concluding, how that the Introduction of the breadth or amplitude of Figure, and the Resistance of the water against penetration, have nothing to do in the Effect of descending, or ascending, or resting in the water. [D]Take a piece of wood or other Matter, of which a Ball ascends from the Bottom of the water to the Surface, more slowly than a Ball of Ebony of the same bignesse, so that it is manifest, that the Ball of Ebony more readily divideth the water in descending, than the other in ascending; as for Example, let the Wood be Walnut-tree. Then take a Board of Walnut-tree, like and equall to that of Ebony of the Antagonists, which swims; and if it be true, that this floats above water, by reason of the Figure, unable through its breadth, to pierce the Crassitude of the same, the other of Wallnut-tree, without all question, being thrust unto the Bottom, will stay there, as less apt, through the same impediment of Figure, to divide the said Resistance of the water. But if we shall find, and by experience see, that not only the thin Board, but every other Figure of the same Wallnut-tree will return to float, as undoubtedly we shall, then I must desier my opposers to forbear to attribute the floating of the Ebony, unto the Figure of the Board, in regard that the Resistance of the water is the same, as well to the ascent, as to the descent, and the force of the Wallnut-trees ascension, is lesse than the Ebonys force in going to the Bottom. [D] The Figure & Resistance of the Medium against Division, have nothing to do with the Effect of Natation or Submersion, by an Experiment in Wallnut tree. [Sidenote: An Experiment in Gold, to prove the non-operating of Figure in Natation and Submersion.]