That there is no other form of motion opposed as contrary to the circular may be proved in various ways.In the first place, there is an obvious tendency to oppose the straight line to the circular.For concave and convex are a not only regarded as opposed to one another, but they are also coupled together and treated as a unity in opposition to the straight.And so, if there is a contrary to circular motion, motion in a straight line must be recognized as having the best claim to that name.But the two forms of rectilinear motion are opposed to one another by reason of their places; for up and down is a difference and a contrary opposition in place.Secondly, it may be thought that the same reasoning which holds good of the rectilinear path applies also the circular, movement from A to B being opposed as contrary to movement from B to A.But what is meant is still rectilinear motion.For that is limited to a single path, while the circular paths which pass through the same two points are infinite in number.Even if we are confined to the single semicircle and the opposition is between movement from C to D and from D to C
along that semicircle, the case is no better.For the motion is the same as that along the diameter, since we invariably regard the distance between two points as the length of the straight line which joins them.It is no more satisfactory to construct a circle and treat motion 'along one semicircle as contrary to motion along the other.
For example, taking a complete circle, motion from E to F on the semicircle G may be opposed to motion from F to E on the semicircle H.
But even supposing these are contraries, it in no way follows that the reverse motions on the complete circumference contraries.Nor again can motion along the circle from A to B be regarded as the contrary of motion from A to C: for the motion goes from the same point towards the same point, and contrary motion was distinguished as motion from a contrary to its contrary.And even if the motion round a circle is the contrary of the reverse motion, one of the two would be ineffective:
for both move to the same point, because that which moves in a circle, at whatever point it begins, must necessarily pass through all the contrary places alike.(By contrarieties of place I mean up and down, back and front, and right and left; and the contrary oppositions of movements are determined by those of places.) One of the motions, then, would be ineffective, for if the two motions were of equal strength, there would be no movement either way, and if one of the two were preponderant, the other would be inoperative.So that if both bodies were there, one of them, inasmuch as it would not be moving with its own movement, would be useless, in the sense in which a shoe is useless when it is not worn.But God and nature create nothing that has not its use.
