I say:

This is like their saying that motion does not exist, sound does not exist, and speech does not exist. This wording is ambiguous. If by “existent” one means something whose parts coexist at a single moment, then these do not exist in that sense. But if one intends a broader meaning that includes what comes into existence successively, then all these exist. Their existence, however, is successive, not simultaneous.

The second:

We explained in the chapter on the finitude of bodies that when something is finite in one direction and infinite in another, adding something at its finite end, thereby extending it, produces an increase only at the finite end, not in the other direction. It does not follow that it becomes finite in the other direction.

One might, however, say:

We mentally suppose that the finite end of the greater collection is aligned with the finite end of the smaller collection; the difference must then become apparent at the other end.

But even if we concede that this alignment is valid, the end of the greater collection can be aligned with that of the smaller only with a numerical surplus belonging to the greater. Nevertheless, it remains possible that the greater collection extends alongside the smaller forever, without the smaller coming to an end. Rather, it continues forever alongside the greater, with that numerical surplus remaining.

The third:

To counter this with four cases. First: the possibility of the occurrence of