go 4. MifceUanea Curio fa* 



wife, that He gives of Chymical Precipita- 

 tion agrees very well with what I propofe : 

 So that of thefe I fhall fay no more. 



But becaufe in the beginning of my Dif- 

 courfe, I fay that the forementioned Law of 

 Hydroftatich is a little defective, I defire to ex- 

 plain my felf a little further in that P6int. In 

 Weights falling through the Air, were Gra- 

 vity only confider'd, the Proportions of their 

 Defcents would be exactly as Galileo has de- 

 monstrated } but it is allow'd by-all, that the 

 Refinance of the Air, not being confider'd in 

 thofe Demonftrations, they are not Mathe- 

 matically true in Pra&ifie, but that really 

 there is fomething of that proportion hind- 

 red by the Airs Refinance. Now, what is 

 this lefs than to Fay, that the Refinance of 

 the Air takes off fome of the Operation of 

 Gravity, or is able to with (land or oppofe 

 part of its Action ? And if fo, what fhall we 

 lay were an Iron Sphere let through a Me- 

 dium of Water? Surely the Proportions of 

 its defcents would be much more difturbed 

 herein, as Water is much more Solid and dif- 

 ficult to be feparated or palled through than 

 Air, and consequently we mult needs grant, 

 that more of the Operation of Gravity, is 

 taken off or refilled by this Oppofition of the 

 Water, than that of the Air. And if fo, . 

 furely there may be a certain degree of Gra- 

 vity, that may be quite taken off by the 

 refinance of the Water: Were a Piftol Bul- 

 let let fall through the Air, it would defcend 

 imperceptibly nigh the Proportions that Ga+ 

 tiled has affigned, . but were a fingle grain 

 of Sand fo let fall, it would be much hindred 



in 



