The philosophical and mathematical commentaries of Proclus on the first book of Euclid's elements (Vol. 1 of 2) : $b To which are added, A history of the restoration of Platonic theology, by the latter Platonists: And a translation from the Greek of Proclus's Theological elementsProclus
Philosophy
The philosophical and mathematical commentaries of Proclus on the first book of Euclid's elements (Vol. 1 of 2) : $b To which are added, A history of the restoration of Platonic theology, by the latter Platonists: And a translation from the Greek of Proclus's Theological elements
Proclus
Euclid. Elements; Platonists
there are three motions, one according to a right line; the other
circular; and the third mixed. But some oppose this division, and
say that there are not two simple lines alone, but that there is a
certain third line given, i. e. a helix or spiral, which is described
about a cylinder[141], when, whilst a right line is moved round the
superficies of the cylinder, a point in the line is carried along with
an equal celerity. For by this means, a helix, or circumvolute line,
is produced, which adapts all the parts of itself to all, according to
a similitude of parts, as Apollonius shews in his book concerning the
Cochlea; which passion, among all spirals, agrees to this alone. For
the parts of a plane helix are dissimilar among themselves; as also of
those which are described about a cone and sphere. But the cylindric
spiral alone, consists of similar parts in the same manner as a right
and circular line. Are there, then, three simple lines, and not two
only? To which doubt we reply, that a helix of this kind is, indeed, of
similar parts, as Apollonius teaches, but is by no means simple; since
among natural productions, gold and silver are composed of similar
parts, but are not simple bodies. But the generation of the cylindric
helix evinces that its mixture is from things simple; for it originates
while a right line is circularly moved round the axis of the cylinder,
a point at the same time flowing along in the right line. Two simple
motions, therefore, compose its nature; and, on this account, it is
among the number of mixt lines, and not among such as are simple: for
that which is composed from dissimilars is not simple, but mixt. Hence,
Geminus, with great propriety, when he admits that some simple lines
may be produced from many motions, does not grant that every such line
is mixt; but that alone, which arises from dissimilar motions. For if
you conceive a square, and two motions which are performed with an
equal celerity, one according to the length, but the other according
to the breadth, a right line or the diameter will be produced; but
the right line will not, on this account, be mixed: for no other line
precedes it, formed by a simple motion, as we asserted of the cylindric
helix. Nor yet, if you suppose a right line, moving in a right angle,
and by a bisection to describe a circle[142], is the circular line, on
this account, produced with mixture: for the extremities of that which
is moved after this manner, since they are equally moved, will describe
a right line; and the bisection, since it is unequally devolved, will
delineate a circle; but the other points will describe an ellipsis. On
which account, the generation of a circular line is the consequence
of that inequality of lation arising from the bisection; because a
right line was supposed to be moved in a right angle, but not in a
natural manner. And thus much concerning the generation of lines. But
it seems, that of the two simple lines, the right and the circular,
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account