Uniform and Nonuniform Motion and The Merton College Mean Speed Theorem

William Heytesbury (fl. ca. 1350)

Translated by Ernest A. Moody

Reprinted in __A
Source Book in Medieval Science__ (pp.237- 241) from __The Science of
Mechanics in the Middle Ages__

[Part VI. Local Motion]

[Prologue]

There are three categories or generic ways in which motion, in the strict sense, can occur. For whatever is moved, is changed either in its place, or in its quantity, or in its quality. And since, in general, any successive motion whatever is fast or slow, and since no single method of determining velocity is applicable in the same sense to all three kinds of motion, it will be suitable to show how any change of this sort may be distinguished from another change of its own kind, with respect to speed or slowness. And because local motion is prior in nature to the other kinds, as the primary kind, we will carry out our intention in this section, with respect to local motion, before treating of the other kinds.

[1. Measure of Uniform Velocity]

Although change of place is of diverse kinds, and is varied according to several essential as well as accidental differences, yet it will suffice for our purposes to distinguish uniform motion from nonuniform motion. Of local motions, then, that motion is called uniform in which an equal distance is continuously traversed with equal velocity in an equal part of time. Nonuniform motion can, on the other hand, be varied in an infinite number of ways, both with respect to the magnitude, and with respect to the time.

In uniform
motion, then, the velocity of a magnitude as a whole is in all cases measured (*metietur*)
by the linear path traversed by the point which is in most rapid motion, if
there is such a point. And according as the position of this point is changed
uniformly or nonuniformly, the complete motion of the whole body is said to be
uniform or difform (nonuniform). Thus, given a magnitude whose most rapidly
moving point is moved uniformly, then, however much the remaining points may be
moving nonuniformly, that magnitude as a whole is said to be in uniform
movement…

[2. Measure of Nonuniform Velocity]

In
nonuniform motion, however, the velocity at any given instant will be measured
(*attendetur*) by the path which *would* be described by the most
rapidly moving point if, in a period of time, it were moved uniformly at the
same degree of velocity (*uniformiter* *illo gradu velocitatis*) with
which it is moved in that given instant, whatever [instant] be assigned. For suppose that the point A will be
continuously accelerated throughout an hour. It is not then necessary that, in
any instant of that hour as a whole, its velocity be measured by the line which
that point describes in that hour. For it is not required, in order that any
two points or any other two moving things be moved at equal velocity, that they
should traverse equal spaces in an equal time; but it is possible that they
traverse unequal spaces, in whatever proportion you may please. For suppose
that point A is moved continuously and uniformly at C degrees of velocity, for
an hour, and that it traverses a distance of a foot. And suppose that point B
commences to move, from rest and in the first half of that hour *accelerates*
its velocity to C degrees, while in the second half hour it decelerates from
this velocity to rest. It is then found that at the middle instant of the whole
hour point B will be moving at C degrees of velocity, and will fully equal the
velocity of the point A. And yet, at the middle instant of that hour, B will
not have traversed as long a line as A, other things being equal. In similar
manner, the point B, traversing a finite line as small as you please, can be
accelerated in its motion beyond any limit; for, in the first proportional part
of that time, it may have a certain velocity, and in the second proportional
part, twice that velocity, and in the third proportional part, four times that
velocity, and so on without limit.

From this
it clearly follows, that such a nonuniform or instantaneous velocity (*velocitas
instantanea*) is not measured by the distance traversed, but by the distance
which would be traversed by such a point, *if* it were moved uniformly
over such or such a period of time at that degree of velocity with which it is
moved in that assigned instant.

[3. Measure of Uniform Acceleration]

With regard
to the acceleration (*intensio*) and deceleration (*remisso*) of
local motion, however, it is to be noted that there are two ways in which a
motion may be accelerated or decelerated: namely, uniformly, or nonuniformly.
For any motion whatever is *uniformly accelerated *(*uniformiter
intenditur*) if, in each of any equal parts of the time whatsoever, it
acquires an equal increment (*latitudo*) of velocity. But a motion is *nonuniformly*
*accelerated or decelerated*, when it acquires or loses a greater
increment of velocity in one part of the time than in another equal part.

In view of this, it is sufficiently apparent that when the latitude of motion or velocity is infinite, it is impossible for any body to acquire that latitude uniformly, in any finite time. And since any degree of velocity whatsoever differs by a finite amount from zero velocity, or from the privative limit of the intensive scale, which is rest – therefore any mobile body may be uniformly accelerated from rest to any assigned degree of velocity; and likewise, it may be decelerated uniformly from any assigned velocity, to rest. And, in general, both kinds of change may take place uniformly, from any degree of velocity to any other degree.

In this
connection, it should be noted that just as there is no degree of velocity by
which, with continuously uniform motion, a greater distance is traversed in one
part of the time than in another equal part of the time, so there is no
latitude (i.e., increment, *latitudo*) of velocity between zero degree [of
velocity] and some finite degree, through which a greater distance is traversed
by uniformly accelerated motion in some given time, than would be traversed in
an equal time by a uniformly decelerated motion of that latitude. For whether
it commences from zero degree or from some [finite] degree, every latitude, as
long as it is terminated at some finite degree, and as long as it is acquired
or lost uniformly, will correspond to its mean degree [of velocity]. Thus the moving
body, acquiring or losing this latitude uniformly during some assigned period
of time, will traverse a distance exactly equal to what it would traverse in an
equal period of time if it were moved uniformly at its mean degree [of
velocity].

2. For of every such latitude commencing from rest and terminating at some [finite] degree [of velocity], the mean degree is one-half the terminal degree [of velocity] of that same latitude.

3. From this it follows that the mean degree of any latitude bounded by two degrees (taken either inclusively or exclusively) is more than half the more intense degree bounding that latitude.

4. From the foregoing it follows that when any mobile body is uniformly accelerated from rest to some given degree [of velocity], it will in that time traverse one-half the distance that it would traverse if, in that same time, it were moved uniformly at the degree [of velocity] terminating that latitude. For that motion, as a whole, will correspond to the mean degree of that latitude, which is precisely one-half that degree which is its terminal velocity.

5. It also follows in the same way that when any moving body is uniformly accelerated from some degree [of velocity] (taken exclusively) to another degree inclusively or exclusively, it will traverse more than one-half the distance which it would traverse with a uniform motion, in an equal time, at the degree [of velocity] at which it arrives in the accelerated motion. For that whole motion will correspond to its mean degree [of velocity], which is greater than one-half of the degree [of velocity] terminating the latitude to be acquired; for although a nonuniform motion of this kind will likewise correspond to its mean degree [of velocity] contained in this latitude being acquired, and, likewise, it will be as slow.

6. To prove, however, that in the case of acceleration from rest to a finite degree [of velocity], the mean degree [of velocity] is exactly one-half the terminal degree [of velocity], it should be known that if any three terms are in continuous proportion, the ratio of the first to the second, or of the second to the third, will be the same as the ratio of the difference between the first and the middle, to the difference between the middle and the third; as when the terms are 4, 2, 1; 9, 3, 1; 9, 6, 4. For as 4 is to 2, or as 2 is to 1, so is the proportion of the difference between 4 and 2 to the difference between 2 and 1, because the difference between 4 and 2 is 2, while that between 2 and 1 is 1; and so with the other cases.

Let there be assigned, then, some term under which there is an infinite series of other terms which are in continuous proportion according to the ratio 2 to 1. Let each term be considered in relation to the one immediately following it. Then, whatever is the difference between the first term assigned and the second, such precisely will be the sum of all the differences between the succeeding terms. For whatever is the amount of the first proportional part of any continuum or of any finite quantity, such precisely is the amount of the sum of all the remaining proportional parts of it.

Since, therefore, every latitude is a certain quantity, and since, in general, in every quantity the mean is equidistant from the extremes, so the mean degree of any finite latitude whatsoever is equidistant from the two extremes, whether these two extremes be both of them positive degrees, or one of them be a certain degree and the other a privation of it or zero degree.

But, as has already been shown, given some degree under which there is an infinite series of other degrees in continuous proportion, and letting each term be considered in relation to the one next to it, then the difference or latitude between the first and the second degree – the one, namely, that is half the first – will be equal to the latitude composed of all the differences or latitudes between all the remaining degrees -namely those which come after the first two. Hence, exactly equally and by an equal latitude that second degree, which is related to the first as a half to its double, will differ from that double as that same degree differs from zero degree or from the opposite extreme of the given magnitude.

And so it is proved universally for every latitude commencing from zero degree and terminating at some finite degree, and containing some degree and half that degree and one-quarter of that degree, and so on to infinity, that its mean degree is exactly one-half its terminal degree. Hence this is not only true of the latitude of velocity of motion commencing from zero degree [of velocity], but it could be proved and argued in just the same way in the case of latitudes of heat, cold, light, and other such qualities.

7. With respect, however, to the distance traversed in a uniformly accelerated motion commencing from zero degree [of velocity] and terminating at some finite degree [of velocity], it has already been said that the motion as a whole, or its whole acquisition, will correspond to its mean degree [of velocity]. The same thing holds true if the latitude of motion is uniformly acquired from some degree [of velocity] in an exclusive sense, and is terminated at some finite degree [of velocity].

From the foregoing it can be sufficiently determined for this kind of uniform acceleration or deceleration how great a distance will be traversed, other things being equal, in the first half of the time and how much in the second half. For when the acceleration of a motion takes place uniformly from zero degree [of velocity] to some degree [of velocity], the distance it will traverse in the first half of the time will be exactly one-third of that which it will traverse in the second half of the time.

And if, contrariwise, from that same degree [of velocity] or from any other degree whatsoever, there is uniform deceleration to zero degree [of velocity], exactly three times the distance will be traversed in the first half of the time, as will be traversed in the second half. For every motion as a whole, completed in a whole period of time, corresponds to its mean degree [of velocity] – namely, to the degree it will have at the middle instant of the time. And the second half of the motion in question will correspond to the mean degree of the second half of that same motion, which is one-fourth of the degree [of velocity] terminating that latitude. Consequently, since this second half will last only through half the time, exactly one-fourth of the distance will be traversed in that second half as will be traversed in the whole motion. Therefore, of the whole distance being traversed by the whole motion, three-quarters will be traversed in the first half of the whole motion, and the last quarter will be traversed in its second half. It follows, consequently, that in this type of uniform intension and remission of a motion from some degree [of velocity] to zero degree, or from zero degree to some degree, exactly three times as much distance is traversed in the more intense half of the latitude as in the less intense half.

8. But any motion can be uniformly accelerated or decelerated from some degree [of velocity] to another degree in an endless number of ways, because it may be from some degree to a degree half of that, or to a degree one-fourth of it, or one-fifth, or to a degree two-thirds of that degree, or three quarters of it, and so on. Consequently there can be no universal numerical value by which one will be able to determine, for all cases, how much more distance would be traversed in the first half of this sort of acceleration or deceleration than in the second half, because, according to the diversity of the extreme degrees [of velocity], there will be diverse proportions of distance traversed in the first half of the time to distance traversed in the second half.

But if the extreme degrees [of velocity] are determined, so that it is known, for instance, that so much distance would be traversed in such or such a time by a uniform motion at the more intense limiting degree [of velocity], and if this is likewise known with respect to the less intense limiting degree [of velocity], then it will be known by calculation how much would be traversed in the first half and also how much in the second. For, if the extreme degrees [of velocity] are known in this way, the mean degree [of velocity] of these can be obtained, and also the mean degree between that mean degree and the more intense degree terminating the latitude. But a calculation of this kind offers more difficulty than advantage.

And it is sufficient, therefore, for every case of this kind, to state as a general law, that more distance will be traversed by the more intense half of such a latitude than by the less intense half – as much more, namely, as would be [the excess of distance] traversed by the mean degree [of velocity] of this more intense half, if it moved in a time equal to that in which this half is acquired or lost uniformly, over that [distance which] would be traversed by the mean degree [of velocity] of the less intense half, in the same time.

9. But as
concerns nonuniform acceleration or deceleration, whether from some degree [of
velocity] to zero degree or *vice versa*, or from one degree to some other
degree, there can be no rule determining the distance traversed in such or such
time, or determining the intrinsic degree to which such a latitude of motion,
acquired or lost nonuniformly, will correspond. For just as such a nonuniform
acceleration or deceleration could vary in an infinite number of ways, so also
that motion as a whole could correspond to an infinite number of intrinsic
degrees [of velocity] of its latitude – indeed, to any intrinsic degree
whatsoever, of the latitude thus acquired or lost.

In general,
therefore, the degree [of velocity] terminating such a latitude at its more
intense limit is the most remiss degree [of velocity], beyond the other limit
(i.e., the most remiss extreme) of the latitude, to which such a nonuniformly
nonuniform motion as a whole *cannot* correspond; and the degree [of
velocity] terminating that latitude at its more remiss limit is the most
intense degree [of velocity] beneath the upper limit of the same latitude, to
which such a nonuniformly nonuniform motion *cannot* correspond.
Consequently, it is not possible for such a motion as a whole to correspond to
such a remiss degree (as that of the
lower limit); nor to such an intense degree (as the upper limit).