Part 13

1. Consider its opacity, if you marke these sublunary things, you shall perceive that amongst them, those that are most perspicuous, are not so well able to reverberate the Sunne beames as the thicker bodies. The rayes passe singly through a diaphanous matter, but in an opacous substance they are doubled in their returne and multiplyed by reflexion. Now if the moone and the other Planets can shine so clearely by beating backe the Sunne beames, why may not the earth also shine as well, which agrees with them in the cause of this brightnesse their opacity?

2. Consider what a cleare light wee may discerne reflected from the earth in the middest of Summer, and withall conceive how much greater that must bee which is under the line, where the rayes are more directly and strongly reverberated.

3. Consider the great distance at which wee behold the Planets, for this must needs adde much to their shining and therefore Cusanus (in the above cited place) thinkes that if a man were in the Sunne, that Planet would not appeare so bright to him, as now it doth to us, because then his eye could discerne but little, whereas here wee may comprehend the beames as they are contracted in a narrow body. Keplar beholding the earth from a high mountaine when it was enlightned by the Sunne confesses that it appeared unto him of an incredible brightnesse, whereas then the reflected rayes entered into his sight obliquely; but how much brighter would it have appeared if hee might in a direct line behold the whole globe of earth and these rayes gathered together? So that if wee consider that great light which the earth receives from the Sunne in the Summer, and then suppose wee were in the Moone, where wee might see the whole earth hanging in those vast spaces where there is nothing to terminate the sight, but those beames which are there contracted into a little compasse; I say, if wee doe well consider this, wee may easily conceive, that our earth appeares as bright to those other inhabitants in the Moone, as theirs doth to us.

Proposition 12.

That tis probable there may bee such Meteors belonging to that world in the Moone, as there are with us.

Plutarch discussing this point affirmes that it is not necessary there should be the same meanes of growth and fructifying in both these worlds, since nature might in her policy finde out more waies then one how to bring about the same effect. But however he thinks its probable that the Moone her selfe sendeth forth warme winds, and by the swiftnesse of her motion there should breathe out a sweet and comfortable ayer, pleasant dewes and gentle moysture, which might serve for the refreshing and nourishment of the inhabitants and plants in that other world.

But since they have all things alike with us, as sea and land, and vaporous ayer encompassing both, I should rather therefore thinke that nature there should use the same way of producing meteors as she doth with us (and not by a motion as Plutarch supposes) because shee doth not love to vary from her usuall operations without some extraordinary impediment, but still keepes her beaten path unlesse she be driven thence.

One argument whereby I shall manifest this truth, may be taken from those new Starres which have appeared in divers ages of the world, and by their parallax have beene discerned to have been above the Moone, such as was that in Cassiopeia, that in Sagittarius, with many others betwixt the Planets. Hipparchus in his time tooke especiall notice of such as these, and therefore fancied out such constellations in which to place the Starres, shewing how many there were in every asterisme, that so afterwards posterity might know, whether there were any new Starre produced or any old one missing. Now the nature of these Comets may probably manifest, that in this other world there are other meteors also; for these in all likelihood are nothing else but such evaporations caused by the Sunne, from the bodies of the Planets. I shall prove this by shewing the improbabilities and inconveniences of any other opinion.

For the better pursuite of this 'tis in the first place requisite that I deale with our chiefe adversary, Cæsar la Galla, who doth most directly oppose that truth which is here to bee proved. Hee endeavouring to confirme the incorruptibility of the Heavens, and being there to satisfie the argument which is taken from these comets, He answers it thus:

Aut argumentum desumptum ex paralaxi non est efficax, aut si est efficax, eorum instrumentorum usum decipere, vel ratione astri vel medii, vel distantiæ, aut ergo erat in suprema parte aeris, aut si in coelo, tum forsan factum erat ex reflectione radiorum Saturni & Jovis, qui tunc in conjunctione fuerant.

"Either the argument from the paralax is not efficacious, or if it be, yet the use of the instruments might deceive either in regard of the starre or the medium, or the distance, and so this comet might be in the upper regions of the aire, or if it were in the heavens, there it might be produced by the reflexion of the rayes from Saturne and Jupiter, who were then in conjunction."

You see what shifts hee is driven to, how he runnes up and downe to many starting holes, that hee may find some shelter, and in stead of the strength of reason, he answers with a multitude of words, thinking (as the Proverbe is) that hee may use haile, when hee hath no thunder, Nihil turpius (saith *Seneca)

dubio est incerto, pedem modo referente, modo producente.

"What can there bee more unseemely in one that should be a faire disputant, then to be now here, now there, and so uncertaine, that one cannot tell where to find him."

He thinkes that there are not Comets in the heavens, because there may be many other reasons of such appearances, but what he knowes not, perhaps (he saies) that argument from the parallax is not sufficient, or if it be, then there may be some deceit in the observation. To this I may safely say, that hee may justly be accounted a weake Mathematician who mistrusts the strength of this argument, nor can hee know much in Astronomy, who understands not the parallax, which is the foundation of that Science, and I am sure that hee is a timorous man, who dares not believe the frequent experience of his senses, or trust to a demonstration.

True indeed, I grant tis possible, that the eye, the medium, and the distance may al deceive the beholder, but I would have him shew which of all these was likely to cause an error in this observation? Meerely to say they might be deceived is no sufficient answer, for by this I might confute the positions of all Astronomers, and affirme the starres are hard by us, because 'tis possible they may be deceived in their observing that distance. But I forbeare any further reply; my opinion is of that Treatise, that either it was set forth purposely to tempt a confutation, that hee might see the opinion of Galilæus confirmed by others, or else it was invented with as much haste and negligence as it was printed, there being in it almost as many faults as lines.

Others thinke that these are not any new Comets, but some ancient starres that were there before, which now shine with that unusuall brightnesse, by reason of the interposition of such vapors which doe multiply their light, and so the alteration will be here onely, and not in the heavens. Thus Aristotle thought the appearance of the milkie way was produced, for he held that there were many little starres, which by their influence did constantly attract such a vapour towards that place of heaven, so that it alwaies appeared white. Now by the same reason may a brighter vapor be the cause of these appearances.

But how probable soever this opinion may seeme, yet if well considered, you shall finde it to be altogether absurd and impossible: for,

1. These starres were never seene there before, and tis not likely that a vapour being hard by us can so multiply that light which could not before be at all discerned.

2. This supposed vapour cannot be either contracted into a narrow compasse or dilated into a broad: 1. it could not be within a little space, for then that starre would not appeare with the same multiplied light to those in other climates: 2. it cannot be a dilated vapour, for then other starres which were discerned through the same vapour would seeme as bigg as that; this argument is the same in effect with that of the paralax, as you may see in this Figure.

Suppose A B to be a Hemispheare of one earth, C D to be the upper part of the highest region, in which there might be either a contracted vapour, as G, or else a dilated one, as H I. Suppose E F likewise to represent halfe the heavens, wherein was this appearing Comet at K. Now I say, that a contracted vapour, as G, could not cause this appearance, because an inhabitant at M could not discerne the same starre with this brightnesse, but perhaps another at L, betwixt which the vapour is directly interposed. Nor could it be caused by a dilated vapour, as H I, because then all the starres that were discerned through it would be perceived with the same brightnesse.

Tis necessary therefore that the cause of this appearance should be in the heavens. And this is granted by the most and best Astronomers. But, say some, this doth not argue any naturall alteration in those purer bodies, since tis probable that the concourse of many little vagabond starres by the union of their beames may cause so great a light. Of this opinion were Anaxagoras and Zeno amongst the ancient, and Baptista Cisatus, Blancanus, with others amongst our moderne Astronomers. For, say they, when there happens to be a concourse of some few starres, then doe many other flie unto them from all the parts of heaven like so many Bees unto their King. But 1. tis not likely that amongst those which wee count the fixed starres there should be any such uncertaine motions, that they can wander from all parts of the heavens, as if Nature had neglected them, or forgot to appoint them a determinate course. 2. If there be such a conflux of these, as of Bees to their King, then what reason is there that they doe not still tarry with it, that so the Comet may not be dissolved? But enough of this. You may commonly see it confuted by many other arguments. Others there are, who affirme these to be some new created stars, produced by an extraordinary supernaturall power. I answer, true indeed, tis possible they might be so, but however tis not likely they were so, since such appearances may be salved some other way, wherefore to fly unto a miracle for such things, were a great injury to nature, and to derogate from her skill, an indignitie much mis-becomming a man who professes himselfe to be a Philosopher, Miraculum (saith one) est ignorantiæ Asylum, a miracle often serves for the receptacle of a lazy ignorance which any industrious Spirit would be ashamed of, it being but an idle way to shift off the labour of any further search. But here's the misery of it, wee first tie our selves unto Aristotles Principles, and then conclude, that nothing could contradict them but a miracle, whereas 'twould be much better for the Common-wealth of learning, if we would ground our Principles rather upon the frequent experiences of our owne, then the bare authority of others.

Some there are, who thinke that these Comets are nothing else, but exhalations from our earth, carried up into the higher parts of the Heaven. So Peno, Rothmannus & Galilæus, but this is not possible, since by computation 'tis found that one of them is above 300 times bigger than the whole Globe of Land and Water. Others therefore have thought that they did proceed from the body of the Sun, and that that Planet onely is

Cometarum officina, unde tanquam emissarii & exploratores emitterentur, brevi ad solem redituri:

The shop or forge of Comets from whence they were sent, like so many spies, that they might in some short space returne againe, but this cannot be, since if so much matter had proceeded from him alone, it would have made a sensible diminution in his body. The Noble Tycho therefore thinkes that they consist of some such fluider parts of the Heaven, as the milkie way is framed of, which being condenst together, yet not attaining to the consistency of a Starre, is in some space of time rarified againe into its wonted nature. But this is not likely, for if there had beene so great a condensation as to make them shine so bright, and last so long, they would then sensibly have moved downewards towards some center of gravity, because whatsoever is condenst must necessarily grow heavier, whereas these rather seemed to ascend higher, as they lasted longer. But some may object, that a thing may be of the same weight, when it is rarified, as it had while it was condenst: so metalls, when they are melted, and when they are cold: so water also when it is frozen, and when it is fluid, doth not differ in respect of gravity. But to these I answer: First, Metalls are not rarified by melting, but molified. Secondly, waters are not properly condensed, but congealed into a harder substance, the parts being not contracted closer together, but still possessing the same extension.

And beside, what likely cause can we conceive of this condensation, unlesse there be such qualities there, as there are in our ayre, and then why may not the Planets have the like qualities, as our earth? and if so, then 'tis more probable that they are made by the ordinary way of nature, as they are with us, and consist of exhalations from the bodies of the Planets. Nor is this a singular opinion; but it seemed most likely to Camillus Gloriosus, Th. Campanella, Fromondus, with some others. But if you aske whither all these exhalations shall returne, I answer, every one into his owne Planet: if it be againe objected, that then there will be so many centers of gravity, and each severall Planet will be a distinct world; I reply, perhaps all of them are so except the Sunne, though Cusanus thinkes there is one also, and later times have discovered some lesser Planets moving round about him. But as for Saturne, he hath two Moones on each side. Jupiter hath foure, that incircle his body with their motion. Venus is observed to increase and decrease as the Moone. Mars, and all the rest, derive their light from the Sunne onely. Concerning Mercury, there hath beene little or no observation, because for the most part, he lies hid under the Sunne beames, and seldome appeares by himselfe. So that if you consider their quantity, their opacity, or these other discoveries, you shall finde it probable enough, that each of them may be a severall world. But this would be too much for to vent at the first: the chiefe thing at which I now ayme in this discourse, is to prove that there may be one in the Moone.

It hath beene before confirmed that there was a spheare of thicke vaporous aire encompasing the Moone, as the first and second regions doe this earth. I have now shewed, that thence such exhalations may proceede as doe produce the Comets: now from hence it may probably follow, that there may be wind also and raine, with such other Meteors as are common amongst us. This consequence is so dependant, that Fromondus dares not deny it, though hee would (as hee confesses himselfe) for if the Sunne be able to exhale from them such fumes as may cause Comets, why not then such as may cause winds, and why not such also as cause raine, since I have above shewed, that there is Sea and Land as with us. Now raine seemes to be more especially requisite for them, since it may allay the heate and scorchings of the Sunne, when he is over their heads. And nature hath thus provided for those in Peru, with the other inhabitants under the line.

But if there be such great, and frequent alterations in the Heavens, why cannot wee discerne them?