The Notebooks of Leonardo Da Vinci by Leonardo Da Vinci (moboreader txt) 📕

the body e, by the same motion, is diminished 1/5 of its whole size. Therefore, by that same last proposition but one, that which is said in this last proposition is true; and this I say of the motions of the celestial bodies which are more distant by 3500 miles when setting than when overhead, and yet do not increase or diminish in any sensible degree.

 

871.

 

a b is the aperture through which the sun passes, and if you could measure the size of the solar rays at n m, you could accurately trace the real lines of the convergence of the solar rays, the mirror being at a b, and then show the reflected rays at equal angles to n m; but, as you want to have them at n m, take them at the. inner side of the aperture at cd, where they maybe measured at the spot where the solar rays fall. Then place your mirror at the distance a b, making the rays d b, c a fall and then be reflected at equal angles towards c d; and this is the best method, but you must use this mirror always in the same month, and the same day, and hour and instant, and this will be better than at no fixed time because when the sun is at a certain distance it produces a certain pyramid of rays.

 

872.

 

a, the side of the body in light and shade b, faces the whole portion of the hemisphere bed e f, and does not face any part of the darkness of the earth. And the same occurs at the point o; therefore the space a o is throughout of one and the same brightness, and s faces only four degrees of the hemisphere d e f g h, and also the whole of the earth s h, which will render it darker; and how much must be demonstrated by calculation. [Footnote: This passage, which has perhaps a doubtful right to its place in this connection, stands in the Manuscript between those given in Vol. I as No. 117 and No. 427.]

 

873.

 

THE REASON OF THE INCREASED SIZE OF THE SUN IN THE WEST.

Some mathematicians explain that the sun looks larger as it sets, because the eye always sees it through a denser atmosphere, alleging that objects seen through mist or through water appear larger. To these I reply: No; because objects seen through a mist are similar in colour to those at a distance; but not being similarly diminished they appear larger. Again, nothing increases in size in smooth water; and the proof of this may be seen by throwing a light on a board placed half under water. But the reason why the sun looks larger is that every luminous body appears larger in proportion as it is more remote. [Footnote: Lines 5 and 6 are thus rendered by M. RAVAISSON in his edition of MS. A. “De meme, aucune chose ne croit dans l’eau plane, et tu en feras l’experience en calquant un ais sous l’eau.”—Compare the diagrams in Vol. I, p. 114.]

On the luminosity of the Earth in the universal space (874-878).

 

874.

 

In my book I propose to show, how the ocean and the other seas must, by means of the sun, make our world shine with the appearance of a moon, and to the remoter worlds it looks like a star; and this I shall prove.

Show, first that every light at a distance from the eye throws out rays which appear to increase the size of the luminous body; and from this it follows that 2 …[Footnote 10: Here the text breaks off; lines 11 and fol. are written in the margin.].

[11]The moon is cold and moist. Water is cold and moist. Thus our seas must appear to the moon as the moon does to us.

 

875.

 

The waves in water magnify the image of an object reflected in it.

Let a be the sun, and n m the ruffled water, b the image of the sun when the water is smooth. Let f be the eye which sees the image in all the waves included within the base of the triangle c e f. Now the sun reflected in the unruffled surface occupied the space c d, while in the ruffled surface it covers all the watery space c e (as is proved in the 4th of my “Perspective”) [Footnote 9: Nel quarto della mia prospettiva. If this reference is to the diagrams accompanying the text—as is usual with Leonardo—and not to some particular work, the largest of the diagrams here given must be meant. It is the lowest and actually the fifth, but he would have called it the fourth, for the text here given is preceded on the same page of the manuscript by a passage on whirlpools, with the diagram belonging to it also reproduced here. The words della mia prospettiva may therefore indicate that the diagram to the preceding chapter treating on a heterogeneal subject is to be excluded. It is a further difficulty that this diagram belongs properly to lines 9-10 and not to the preceding sentence. The reflection of the sun in water is also discussed in the Theoretical part of the Book on Painting; see Vol. I, No. 206, 207.] and it will cover more of the water in proportion as the reflected image is remote from the eye [10].

[Footnote: In the original sketch, inside the circle in the first diagram, is written Sole (sun), and to the right of it luna (moon). Thus either of these heavenly bodies may be supposed to fill that space. Within the lower circle is written simulacro (image). In the two next diagrams at the spot here marked L the word Luna is written, and in the last sole is written in the top circle at a.]

The image of the sun will be more brightly shown in small waves than in large ones—and this is because the reflections or images of the sun are more numerous in the small waves than in large ones, and the more numerous reflections of its radiance give a larger light than the fewer.

Waves which intersect like the scales of a fir cone reflect the image of the sun with the greatest splendour; and this is the case because the images are as many as the ridges of the waves on which the sun shines, and the shadows between these waves are small and not very dark; and the radiance of so many reflections together becomes united in the image which is transmitted to the eye, so that these shadows are imperceptible.

That reflection of the sun will cover most space on the surface of the water which is most remote from the eye which sees it.

Let a be the sun, p q the reflection of the sun; a b is the surface of the water, in which the sun is mirrored, and r the eye which sees this reflection on the surface of the water occupying the space o m. c is the eye at a greater distance from the surface of the water and also from the reflection; hence this reflection covers a larger space of water, by the distance between n and o.

 

876.

 

It is impossible that the side of a spherical mirror, illuminated by the sun, should reflect its radiance unless this mirror were undulating or filled with bubbles.

You see here the sun which lights up the moon, a spherical mirror, and all of its surface, which faces the sun is rendered radiant.

Whence it may be concluded that what shines in the moon is water like that of our seas, and in waves as that is; and that portion which does not shine consists of islands and terra firma.

This diagram, of several spherical bodies interposed between the eye and the sun, is given to show that, just as the reflection of the sun is seen in each of these bodies, in the same way that image may be seen in each curve of the waves of the sea; and as in these many spheres many reflections of the sun are seen, so in many waves there are many images, each of which at a great distance is much magnified to the eye. And, as this happens with each wave, the spaces interposed between the waves are concealed; and, for this reason, it looks as though the many suns mirrored in the many waves were but one continuous sun; and the shadows,, mixed up with the luminous images, render this radiance less brilliant than that of the sun mirrored in these waves.

[Footnote: In the original, at letter A in the diagram “Sole” (the sun) is written, and at o “occhio” (the eye).]

 

877.

 

This will have before it the treatise on light and shade.

The edges in the moon will be most strongly lighted and reflect most light, because, there, nothing will be visible but the tops of the waves of the water [Footnote 5: I have thought it unnecessary to reproduce the detailed explanation of the theory of reflection on waves contained in the passage which follows this.].

 

878.

 

The sun will appear larger in moving water or on waves than in still water; an example is the light reflected on the strings of a monochord.

II.

THE SUN.

The question of the true and of the apparent size of the sun

(879-884).

879.

 

IN PRAISE OF THE SUN.

If you look at the stars, cutting off the rays (as may be done by looking through a very small hole made with the extreme point of a very fine needle, placed so as almost to touch the eye), you will see those stars so minute that it would seem as though nothing could be smaller; it is in fact their great distance which is the reason of their diminution, for many of them are very many times larger than the star which is the earth with water. Now reflect what this our star must look like at such a distance, and then consider how many stars might be added—both in longitude and latitude—between those stars which are scattered over the darkened sky. But I cannot forbear to condemn many of the ancients, who said that the sun was no larger than it appears; among these was Epicurus, and I believe that he founded his reason on the effects of a light placed in our atmosphere equidistant from the centre of the earth. Any one looking at it never sees it diminished in size at whatever distance; and the rea-

[Footnote 879-882: What Leonardo says of Epicurus— who according to LEWIS, The Astronomy of the ancients, and MADLER, Geschichte der Himmelskunde, did not devote much attention to the study of celestial phenomena—, he probably derived from Book X of Diogenes Laertius, whose Vitae Philosophorum was not printed in Greek till 1533, but the Latin translation appeared in 1475.]

 

880.

 

sons of its size and power I shall reserve for Book 4. But I wonder greatly that Socrates

[Footnote 2: Socrates; I have little light to throw on this reference. Plato’s Socrates himself declares on more than one occasion that in his youth he had turned his mind to the study of celestial phenomena (METEWPA) but not in his later years (see G. C. LEWIS, The Astronomy of the ancients, page 109; MADLER, Geschichte der Himmelskunde, page 41). Here and there in Plato’s writings