The Sleepwalkers (230 page)

The
Dialogue
is
divided
into
four
days.
The
first
is
devoted
to
the
refutation
of
the
Aristotelian
view
of
the
cosmos
in
general.
Passages
of
witty
journalism
alternate
with
others
which
suddenly
ascend
to
an
aloof
and
majestic
vision,
and
the
language
assumes
breath-taking
beauty.
In
attacking
the
Platonic
dualism
of
earthly
corruption
–
heavenly
perfection,
Sagredo
explains:

"I
cannot
without
great
wonder,
nay
more,
disbelief,
hear
it
being
attributed
to
natural
bodies
as
a
great
honour
and
perfection
that
they
are
impassible,
immutable,
inalterable,
etc.:
as,
conversely,
I
hear
it
esteemed
a
great
imperfection
to
be
alterable,
generable,
and
mutable.
It
is
my
opinion
that
the
Earth
is
very
noble
and
admirable
by
reason
of
the
many
and
different
alterations,
mutations,
and
generations
which
incessantly
occur
in
it.
And
if,
without
being
subject
to
any
alteration,
it
had
been
all
one
vast
heap
of
sand,
or
a
mass
of
jade,
or
if,
since
the
time
of
the
deluge,
the
waters
freezing
which
covered
it,
it
had
continued
an
immense
globe
of
crystal,
wherein
nothing
had
ever
grown,
altered,
or
changed,
I
should
have
esteemed
it
a
wretched
lump
of
no
benefit
to
the
Universe,
a
mass
of
idleness,
and
in
a
word
superfluous,
exactly
as
if
it
had
never
been
in
Nature.
The
difference
for
me
would
be
the
same
as
between
a
living
and
a
dead
creature.
I
say
the
same
concerning
the
Moon,
Jupiter,
and
all
the
other
globes
of
the
Universe.
The
more
I
delve
into
the
consideration
of
the
vanity
of
popular
discourses,
the
more
empty
and
simple
I
find
them.
What
greater
folly
can
be
imagined
than
to
call
gems,
silver
and
gold
noble,
and
earth
and
dirt
base?
For
do
not
these
persons
consider
that,
if
there
were
as
great
a
scarcity
of
earth
as
there
is
of
jewels
and
precious
metals,
there
would
be
no
king
who
would
not
gladly
give
a
heap
of
diamonds
and
rubies
and
many
ingots
of
gold
to
purchase
only
so
much
earth
as
would
suffice
to
plant
a
jessamine
in
a
little
pot
or
to
set
a
tangerine
in
it,
that
he
might
see
it
sprout,
grow
up,
and
bring
forth
such
goodly
leaves,
fragrant
flowers,
and
delicate
fruit?

It
is
scarcity
and
plenty
that
make
things
esteemed
and
despised
by
the
vulgar,
who
will
say
that
here
is
a
most
beautiful
diamond,
for
it
resembles
a
clear
water,
and
yet
would
not
part
with
it
for
ten
tons
of
water.
These
men
who
so
extol
incorruptibility,
inalterability,
and
so
on,
speak
thus,
I
believe,
out
of
the
great
desire
they
have
to
live
long
and
for
fear
of
death,
not
considering
that,
if
men
had
been
immortal,
they
would
not
have
had
to
come
into
the
world.
These
people
deserve
to
meet
with
a
Medusa's
head
that
would
transform
them
into
statues
of
diamond
and
jade,
that
so
they
might
become
more
perfect
than
they
are."
¹¹

The
battle
for
and
against
Copernicus
is
really
joined
on
the
second
day,
on
which
the
objections
against
the
earth's
motion
are
refuted
in
terms
of
terrestrial
physics.
The
central
part
of
the
argument
concerns
the
relativity
of
motion.
The
classic
objections
had
all
been
variations
on
the
same
theme:
that
if
the
earth
rotated,
everything
not
firmly
attached
to
it
would
be
left
behind
–
cannon
balls,
falling
stones,
birds,
clouds,
and
so
forth.
In
his
refutation,
Galileo
comes
very
near
to
a
correct
theory
of
impetus,
and
to
Newton's
First
Law.
He
shows
that
a
stone
dropped
from
the
top
of
a
moving
ship's
mast
would
not
be
left
behind
because
the
stone
shares
the
ship's
momentum;
and
by
analogy,
that
a
stone
dropped
from
a
tower,
or
a
cannon
ball
in
flight,
shares
the
earth's
momentum.

But
he
could
not
entirely
break
loose
from
the
Aristotelian
dogma
about
circular
motion.
He
postulates
that
if
a
body
is
left
to
itself,
it
will
continue,
under
its
initial
momentum,
to
move,
not
in
a
straight
line,
but
in
a
circular
orbit
through
eternity.
The
reason
for
this
Galileo
explains
in
the
opening
part
of
the
first
day,
and
repeats
over
and
again: