(5S7> 
He tells you thdit^Whereasyou aj^ure him, Firjtjhat the Expsrtmtnt 
was mAde in cUay d^ys 5 [econdly^that the Frifm was fUcedciofe to the 
hole.fo that the light hud no room to diverge\and thirdly^ that the Image 
Vfios not parallel but trmfverfetothe axis of the Prifm: If thefe Af- 
fertionsbe comparedmth my Relation of the Experiment in the VhiL 
ttanfaUion i\r. 80. />. 307 6. it wiH evidently appear , they canmt be 
. admitted as being dire^ly contrary to what is there delivered. His 
reafons are thefe : 
Firft, that Ifaid, the ends of the long Image feemed femicirculars 
whichy faics be, never happens in any of the three cafes above [aid. Boc 
this is not to fet me at odds with my felf, but with the experiment^ 
for it is there defcribed CO happen in them all; aodlftill ray,itdoth 
happen in them. Let others try the Experiment, and judge. 
Further heraies,th.at the Prifm is placed at a dijlance from the hole 
in the Scheme of the Experiment in . 84, p 40 9 f ♦ Bur^ what if it 
were fo there ? For, that is the Scheme of a demonflratioUy not of the 
experiment ^zx\6. would have fer^^ed for the demonftration., had the 
diftance been put twenty timesgreater than it is. In the Schemes 
of the Experimenc xY. 80./. 3086, and 82./?. 5or6. it isrepre- 
fented clofe, and clofe enough in the Scheme, i\Z". 83, /^.4061: But 
Mr.Linfis thought fit to wink at thefe, and pitch upon the Scheaye 
of a Demonftrauon , and fuch a Scheme too as hath no hole at all 
rcprefented in it. For, the Scheme f 84. p. 491 is this ; t ^S'^'^ 
c 
in which the rays are not fo far difiant from one a- 
norherat GL, but that the hole, bad I cxpreft it- 
might have been put there, and yet have compre- 
hended them. But if we fliould put the hole at 
their decuffation vyet wi l l it not be any thing to his 
purpofe ; the diftance xGorx L being but about 
half the breadth of a fide of the Prifm QAC) 
which I conceive b not the twentieth part of 
^he diftance requifite in his conjeflureo . 
o 
%A9 
Thirdlf^ 
