Book, Paragraph
1 I, 2 | three or four or some other number. If (ii) infinite, then
2 I, 2 | those who inquire into the number of existents: for they inquire
3 I, 4 | assume a smaller and finite number of principles, as Empedocles
4 I, 6 | two or three or more in number.~One they cannot be, for
5 I, 6 | one genus: also a finite number is sufficient, and a finite
6 I, 6 | sufficient, and a finite number, such as the principles
7 I, 6 | that they are a limited number, it is plausible to suppose
8 I, 6 | the elements are three in number would seem, from these and
9 I, 6 | they are more than three in number would seem to be untenable.~
10 I, 6 | It is clear then that the number of elements is neither one
11 I, 7 | are, in a way, not more in number than the contraries, but
12 I, 7 | We have now stated the number of the principles of natural
13 I, 7 | generation, and how the number is reached: and it is clear
14 I, 7 | for the question of the number and the nature of the principles.~
15 II, 1 | cease to be times without number.~This then is one account
16 II, 2 | curved", and likewise "number", "line", and "figure",
17 II, 3 | causes, their character and number. Knowledge is the object
18 II, 3 | relation of 2:1, and generally number), and the parts in the definition.~
19 II, 3 | then perhaps exhausts the number of ways in which the term "
20 II, 3 | difference.)~Such then is the number and nature of the kinds
21 II, 3 | they too can be reduced in number. For "cause" is used in
22 II, 3 | health, the relation 2:1 and number of the octave), and always
23 II, 3 | however, come to six in number, under each of which again
24 II, 3 | suffice for our account of the number of causes and the modes
25 II, 6 | this sort of causation the number of possible causes is infinite.~
26 II, 7 | are causes, and that the number of them is what we have
27 II, 7 | what we have stated. The number is the same as that of the
28 II, 7 | are these and so many in number.~Now, the causes being four,
29 III, 4 | sense (they do not regard number as separable from these),
30 III, 4 | who make them limited in number never make them infinite
31 III, 4 | the elements infinite in number, as Anaxagoras and Democritus
32 III, 4 | felt by everybody-not only number but also mathematical magnitudes
33 III, 4 | that there is an infinite number of worlds. Why should there
34 III, 5 | itself any thing, unless both number and magnitude, of which
35 III, 5 | attribute-the air or the even number.~Thus the view of those
36 III, 5 | intelligible or sensible. Nor can number taken in abstraction be
37 III, 5 | abstraction be infinite, for number or that which has number
38 III, 5 | number or that which has number is numerable. If then the
39 III, 5 | the elements are finite in number. For they must be more than
40 III, 5 | the parts are infinite in number and simple, their proper
41 III, 5 | too will be infinite in number, and the same will be true
42 III, 6 | divisible into magnitudes, number will not be infinite. If,
43 III, 6 | made the infinites two in number, because it is supposed
44 III, 6 | increase, for the parts number only up to the decad.~The
45 III, 7 | natural too to suppose that in number there is a limit in the
46 III, 7 | direction every assigned number is surpassed. In magnitude,
47 III, 7 | man is one man, not many. Number on the other hand is a plurality
48 III, 7 | quantity of them. Hence number must stop at the indivisible:
49 III, 7 | possible to think of a larger number: for the number of times
50 III, 7 | a larger number: for the number of times a magnitude can
51 III, 7 | potential, never actual: the number of parts that can be taken
52 III, 7 | always surpasses any assigned number. But this number is not
53 III, 7 | assigned number. But this number is not separable from the
54 III, 7 | to be, like time and the number of time.~With magnitudes
55 IV, 6 | would also be true that any number of bodies could be together;
56 IV, 8 | there is no ratio of 0 to a number. For if 4 exceeds 3 by 1,
57 IV, 8 | why cannot there be any number coinciding?~This, then,
58 IV, 11 | the more or the less by number, but more or less movement
59 IV, 11 | Time then is a kind of number. (Number, we must note,
60 IV, 11 | then is a kind of number. (Number, we must note, is used in
61 IV, 11 | mutually, so too do the number of the moving body and the
62 IV, 11 | the moving body and the number of its locomotion. For the
63 IV, 11 | its locomotion. For the number of the locomotion is time,
64 IV, 11 | and is like the unit of number.~Time, then, also is both
65 IV, 11 | different.~Hence time is not number in the sense in which there
66 IV, 11 | sense in which there is "number" of the same point because
67 IV, 11 | extremities of a line form a number, and not as the parts of
68 IV, 11 | far as it numbers, it is number; for boundaries belong only
69 IV, 11 | that which they bound, but number (e.g. ten) is the number
70 IV, 11 | number (e.g. ten) is the number of these horses, and belongs
71 IV, 11 | clear, then, that time is "number of movement in respect of
72 IV, 12 | 12~The smallest number, in the strict sense of
73 IV, 12 | strict sense of the word "number", is two. But of number
74 IV, 12 | number", is two. But of number as concrete, sometimes there
75 IV, 12 | with time. In respect of number the minimum is one (or two);
76 IV, 12 | is long or short and as a number many or few, but it is not
77 IV, 12 | or slow-any more than any number with which we number is
78 IV, 12 | any number with which we number is fast or slow.~Further,
79 IV, 12 | are different. Time is not number with which we count, but
80 IV, 12 | which we count, but the number of things which are counted,
81 IV, 12 | are different. And the number of a hundred horses and
82 IV, 12 | movement, since it is its number, and the movement the time.
83 IV, 12 | movement, just as we know the number by what is numbered, e.g.
84 IV, 12 | what is numbered, e.g. the number of the horses by one horse
85 IV, 12 | there are by the use of the number; and again by using the
86 IV, 12 | horse as unit we know the number of the horses itself. So
87 IV, 12 | things that they are "in number". The latter means either
88 IV, 12 | number-or that things have a number.~Now, since time is number,
89 IV, 12 | number.~Now, since time is number, the "now" and the "before"
90 IV, 12 | odd" and "even" are in number, i.e. in the sense that
91 IV, 12 | that the one set belongs to number, the other to time. But
92 IV, 12 | are in time as they are in number. If this is so, they are
93 IV, 12 | same sense as what is in number is so, a time greater than
94 IV, 12 | of decay, since it is the number of change, and change removes
95 IV, 12 | time is not motion, but "number of motion": and what is
96 IV, 12 | rest, also, can be in the number of motion. Not everything
97 IV, 12 | was said above.~"To be in number" means that there is a number
98 IV, 12 | number" means that there is a number of the thing, and that its
99 IV, 12 | being is measured by the number in which it is. Hence if
100 IV, 14 | movement (since it is the number of movement) and all these
101 IV, 14 | evidently there cannot be number; for number is either what
102 IV, 14 | there cannot be number; for number is either what has been,
103 IV, 14 | of movement time is the number of. Must we not say "of
104 IV, 14 | movement that time is the number. And so it is simply the
105 IV, 14 | And so it is simply the number of continuous movement,
106 IV, 14 | now, and there would be a number of each of the two movements.
107 IV, 14 | each, it would be the same number. So, too, movements that
108 IV, 14 | changes is the same if their number also is equal and simultaneous;
109 IV, 14 | everywhere the same, because the number of equal and simultaneous
110 IV, 14 | the measure, because the number of this is the best known.
111 IV, 14 | said rightly, too, that the number of the sheep and of the
112 IV, 14 | of the dogs is the same number if the two numbers are equal,
113 IV, 14 | triangle. Therefore the number of two groups also-is the
114 IV, 14 | groups also-is the same number (for their number does not
115 IV, 14 | the same number (for their number does not differ by a differentia
116 IV, 14 | differ by a differentia of number), but it is not the same
117 V, 2 | of motion and rest, the number of kinds of change, and
118 V, 4 | activities must also in point of number be two (for only that which
119 VI, 2 | not finite but infinite in number.~The passage over the infinite,
120 VI, 2 | divisible into periods equal in number to the segments into which
121 VI, 6 | have completed an infinite number of changes.~Again, since
122 VI, 6 | moments are infinite in number, everything that is changing
123 VI, 6 | have completed an infinite number of changes.~And not only
124 VI, 6 | divisible into an infinite number of segments: consequently,
125 VI, 7 | size individually and in number collectively, the whole
126 VI, 7 | aforesaid part multiplied by the number of the parts.~But it makes
127 VI, 7 | quantity subtracted and of the number of times a subtraction is
128 VI, 8 | divisible into an infinite number of parts.~And since everything
129 VI, 9 | they present, are four in number. The first asserts the non-existence
130 VI, 9 | being composed of an equal number of bodies of equal size,
131 VI, 9 | B...the bodies, equal in number and in size to A, A...,originally
132 VI, 9 | middle of the A’s, equal in number, size, and velocity to B,
133 VII, 1 | in motion are infinite in number the whole motion will be
134 VII, 2 | possessing a greater or lesser number of sensible characteristics
135 VII, 4 | adopt the theory that it is number that constitutes being,
136 VII, 4 | indeed speak of a "greater number" and a "lesser number" within
137 VII, 4 | greater number" and a "lesser number" within the same species,
138 VIII, 1 | that there is an infinite number of worlds, some of which
139 VIII, 1 | motion? If, then, time is the number of motion or itself a kind
140 VIII, 3 | is true, divisible into a number of parts, but no one of
141 VIII, 3 | divisible into an infinite number of parts it does not follow
142 VIII, 5 | part that moves itself or a number of parts each of which moves
143 VIII, 6 | rather than an infinite number. When the consequences of
144 VIII, 6 | rather than infinite in number, since in things constituted
145 VIII, 8 | half-distances are infinite in number, and that it is impossible
146 VIII, 8 | have reckoned an infinite number, which is admittedly impossible.
147 VIII, 8 | within itself an infinite number of units: there is no absurdity,
148 VIII, 8 | traverse or reckon an infinite number of units), nevertheless
149 VIII, 8 | to traverse an infinite number of distances, and suppose
150 VIII, 8 | time contains an infinite number of divisions): then this
151 VIII, 8 | continuous contains an infinite number of halves, they are not
152 VIII, 8 | pass through an infinite number of units either of time
153 VIII, 8 | has traversed an infinite number of units in an accidental
154 VIII, 8 | distance to be an infinite number of half-distances, this
155 VIII, 10| always be infinite-just as a number or a magnitude is-if it
156 VIII, 10| being not one movent but a number of movents consecutive with
|