THE NOTION OF CHAOS: FROM THE COSMOGONICAL CHAOS OF

ANCIENT GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL THOUGHT TO THE CHAOS THEORY OF

MODERN PHYSICS
UDC 113+124.1
Efstratios Theodossiou1, Konstantinos Kalachanis1, Bassilios N. Manimanis1, Milan S.
Dimitrijević2
1
Department of Astrophysics-Astronomy and Mechanics, School of Physics, University
of Athens, Panepistimioupolis, Athens, Greece
E-mail: etheodos@phys.uoa.gr
2
Astronomical Observatory, Belgrade, Serbia

Abstract. Due to the importance of modern science, the appearance of the notion of Chaos in ancient Greek cosmogonies and
philosophical thought and the evolution of its meaning has been studied in this paper. In addition, a comparison has been made
with the meaning of this important notion in modern Theory of Chaos.
Key words: Orpheus, Phanes, Cosmogony, chaos, Chaos Theory, fractals.

INTRODUCTION-COSMOLOGICAL VIEWS
In the ancient Greek civilization where the first philosophers attempted to explain the
creation of the Universe, the hymns of mysticist Orpheus proved to be of significant im-
portance, by introducing the term ‘Chaos’. According to Orpheus, Chaos condenses into
the giant Cosmic Egg, whose rupture resulted in the creation of Phanes and Ouranos and
of all the gods who symbolize the creation the Universe.
Later, Greek philosophers supported the view that chaos describes the unformed and
infinite void, from which the Universe is created. So, this void in ancient Greek thought
is not just an abstract term, but a kind of empty space with cosmogonical characteristics.
In modern physics, the term ‘chaotic’ describes systems whose parameters consist of many
hidden laws, which are difficult to describe and can be changed any time. Due to the
importance of the notion of Chaos in modern science, it is of interest to consider its appear-
ance in ancient Greece and the evolution of its meaning, which is the aim of this paper.

During the early period of development of the first human civilizations, the refined
thought of pioneer priests, astrono- mers and philosophers – through religious faith and
empirical thought – attempted to explain the ‘first beginning’, through which the Universe
came into being. According to Aristotle “For it is owing to their wonder that men both
now begin and at first began to philosophize” (Aristotle, Metaphysics: 982b: 12-13). It is
obvious that the first philosophers at- tempted to explain the origin of natural phenomena.
In this context, wise people who originate from eastern civilizations supported the
existence of gods. According to these people, there are two contingents which resulted in
the creation the universe: a) The universe was created through divine energy, a theory
which is known as ex nihilo creation, and b) There was an eternal matter as substrate,
which finally was format- ted by a God or Gods. A major point in this case is the fact that
the creation of the Universe depends on the mixing and combination of cosmic elements
(Theodossiou, 2007: 31).
In ancient Greece, the teaching of mysticist Orpheus (13th century B.C.) evolved, which
proved to be the initial form of Greek religion, and consisted of poems and hymns of
significant literary value (Orphica, 1805, Orphicorum frag- menta, 1922, Orphic Hymns,
2007).

1
Orpheus, picture on an ancient column crater from Gela.
(ca. 450 BC, Staatliche Museen, Berlin)
ORPHIC COSMOGONY According to the orphic cosmogony, initially
the ageraos (never getting old) Chronos (Time) emerged. Once Chronos was created, he
gave birth to the duality of Aether and Chaos. Then Chronos and Aether created the
cosmic silver Egg, which through its fertilization, brought into being the second divine
triad: the protogonos (the first to appear) Eros or Phanes, God of Light, Metis, the
Goddess of wisdom, skill and craft and finally the life-giving Herikepeos. In the ancient
tradition, it is claimed that Herikepeos had two genders, both the male and female.
The sixth Orphic Hymn ‘6. Protogonos’ speaks of Chaos which condenses into the giant
Cosmic Egg. After the egg was ruptured, its upper part cre- ated Ouranos (the Sky), while the
Earth was created from the bottom part. From the central part of the Egg, Protogonos (first
created) or Phanes took form, whose name also means luminous.


Orpheus Picture from an ancient Greek vessel segment

I invoke Protogonus, of a double nature, great, wandering through the ether, Egg-born, rejoicing in the
golden wings, having the countenance of a bull, the procreator of the blessed gods and mortal men.

It would be useful to note that in ancient Greek philosophy and astronomy, Eros sym-
bolizes the spiritual power of nature that creates the Universe.
Then, Phanes with his sister Nyx (Nychta = Night) gave birth to Ouranos (Uranus), whose
role was dominant among the Gods and Earth: he was the king of the Gods after mοther
Night. It is worth noting that the consecutive birth of Gods according to orphic cosmogony
is similar to the version which is proposed by poet Hesiod in his poem Theogony. So,
Ouranos is displaced by his son Cronus (Saturn), who was also displaced by Zeus, the
creator and ruler of the world. An important person which appears in the or- phic
cosmogony is Dionysus Zagreus, son of Zeus and Persephone, whose birth marks the end
of creation of divine beings in the world.
The Titans sliced and ate Dionysus Zagreus, but goddess Athena saved his heart, through
which Zeus resurrected him. This unholy and desecrating action was punished by Zeus
by striking them with a thunderbolt. The ash of the Titans was the matter through which
God created human beings. But the fact that the ash of the Titans also included the ash of
Dionysus, the human race consists of two natures: 1) the evil or Titanic nature, 2) the
divine/spiritual nature.
Clemens Romanus, the third Bishop of Rome (88-97 or 92-101), in his ‘Epistulae’ compares the hesiodic
cosmogony to that of Orpheus “Orpheus likens Chaos to an Egg, in which all the first elements can be
found mixed. Hesiod perceives this Chaos as a sub- strate, called by Orpheus as Egg (Cosmic Egg), a
creation that emerged from formless matter…”.

• PHANES THE GOD IN THE RELIEF OF THE MUSEUM OF MODENA IN ITALY

In this relief of god Phanes, which on display in the Modena Museum in Italy, the god of
light, truth and justice is depicted surrounded by the ecliptic, with the twelve signs of the
Zodiacal constellations. In the four angles of the relief the winds of the four cardinal
points are depicted, which correspond to the four initial elements: fire, earth, air and wa-
ter. Inside the ecliptic we can see the Cosmic Egg divided into two parts. In the middle of
the relief, Phanes appears through the flames in the form of a man with wings on his
shoulders, since he is the creator Eros. Behind him the crescent of Selene, the Moon is
displayed. Also, Phanes holds a scepter, as the ruler of the world (Phanes and Herike-

2
peos), while in his right hand he holds lightning, just like Zeus, the father of gods and men
(Cook 1925: 1051).
Herikepeos - Phanes - Metis: the Cosmic Egg in its triadic status, the light of Phanes,
Mitis’s wisdom and Herikepeos’s life. A snake huddled around the body of Phanes, which
reaches the top of his head, symbolizes the Earth (Gaia). He has animal hindquarters, just
like the ancient god Pan, who is a Pancosmic (Universal) god (Theodossiou 2007: 33).
The God Phanes
Modena Museum, 2nd c. A.D.

On Phanes’s body three animal heads appear: of the ram, lion, and goat. Professor M. Papathanasiou claims here,
that “The heads of the ram and goat symbolize the astronomical phenomena which appeared during the
construction of the relief in the 2nd century AD, when the vernal equinox was in the constellation of Aries, while
the winter solstice was in the constellation of Capricorn. But the lion head displayed in the center under the chest
is a remnant of ancient astronomical phenomena of the 2nd and 3rd millennium BC, when the vernal equinox was
in the constellation of Taurus, the summer solstice in the constellation of Leo, and the winter solstice in the
constellation of Aquarius” (Papathanassiou, 2009: 296).
Inside the elliptical egg there is a faded inscription: [Ε]YPHROSY[NE ET] FELIX.
Below, outside the ellipsis and above the heads of the winds, there are two capital letters
‘P’: P(ecunia) P(osuit) and below, at the edges of the rectangular sculpture we can see
there is an inscription: FELIX PATER (sacrorum), according to Cook (1925: 1052).

THE MEANING OF THE COSMIC EGG

It is important to note that the meaning of the Cosmic Egg in all cosmological myths
symbolizes the unity from which the whole Universe emerges. Also, the Cosmic Egg that
symbolizes the creation appears in the Orphic Hymns, in Hinduism, in Finnish legends
(Theodossiou 2007: 33) and also in the tradition of the primitive tribe of Dogon, in the
Mali of Western Africa (Griaule, M. and G. Dieterlen 1965).
The Cosmic Egg is the matrix which includes the sperm of cosmic creation. Almost all
ancient legends refer to the Cosmic Egg, because, except for the fact that the egg is the
symbol of creation, it is also the symbol of birth and new life (Danezis and Theodossiou
2003: 228-248).
After the ancient Orphic Hymns, which were probably recorded in the 2nd century AD and also in Hesiod’s
Theogony, the creation of the world is one of the main subjects that philosophers and poets deal with. Let
us see how Hesiod describes the first cosmogonic principles: “Verily at first Chaos came to be, but next the
wide-bosomed Earth, the ever-sure foundations of all (4) the deathless ones who hold the peaks of snowy
Olympus, and dim Tartarus in the depth of the wide- pathed Earth, and Eros (Love).” (Theogony 1914: lyr:
116-123)

Also, Aristophanes (448-380 BC) in his comedy named Aves (The Birds, 414 BC) writes: “At the beginning
there was only Chaos, Night, dark Erebus and deep Tartarus. The earth, the air and heaven did not exist.
First, the black-winged Night laid a germless egg in the bosom of the infinite deeps of Erebus, and from
this, after the revolution of long ages, sprang the graceful Eros with his glittering golden wings, swift as
the whirlwinds of the tempest. He mated in deep Tartarus with dark Chaos, winged like himself, and thus
hatched forth our race, which was the first to see the light. That of the Immortals did not exist until Eros
had brought together all the ingredients of the world and from their marriage Heaven, Ocean, Earth and
the imperishable race of blessed gods sprang into being.”
[Aristoph. Av. 693 (Chor der Vögel)]
Hesiod
National Archaeological Museum of Athens (Roman copy).
Aristophanes
The great comedian also mentions Chaos in his comedy Nebulae (Nephelae). In this comedy, Aristophanes

3
aims to squib Socrates and the Sophists. So, he describes the teachings in which Socrates initiates the naïve
peasant Strepsiades. Socrates orders him to claim as gods only Chaos, Language, and Nebulae
(Aristophanes, Nebulae: 423).

THE MEANING OF CHAOS IN THE ANCIENT GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL THOUGHT

It seems that the meaning of the term ‘Chaos’ – from the Greek root ‘cha’ (Polites 2004,
24) – which is the original situation of the cosmic matter before the creation of the
universe, describes the unformed and infinite void. This void in ancient Greek thought is
not just an abstract term, but a kind of empty space that consists of nebulae and darkness.
Theoretically, Chaos is the infinite space that included, in the form of ‘seeds’, all the ele-
ments which were about to create the universe. Moreover, Chaos was the only creative
principle through which everything emerged. Certainly, this unformed space between the
Earth and the sky has no eternal being, but it was created at some time in the past. This
conclusion originates from Hesiod’s text.
In his poem Theogony, Hesiod claims that Chaos was not present in the beginning of
creation, but that it was created in the beginning, followed by Erevus and Earth. This
means that Hesiod did not intend to answer the question of what existed initially, but what
was created first. So, he does not speak about an eternal first cause of creation.
According to Jaeger (1953: p. 23), Hesiod does not by-pass the question of the first cause
because of his unwillingness to give an answer, but because in his era, this philoso- phical
question had not arisen. In ancient cosmogonies there is no ‘before’, because of the eternal
existence of the universe. Even the Pre-Socratic philosophers, as well as Plato and
Aristotle, were in favor of the idea of the eternal existence of cosmic matter. It is impor-
tant to note that only the Christian Church Fathers and philosophers spoke of the ex nihilo
creation of the universe.
So, the question of what existed before Chaos has no meaning for Hesiod.
In this context, in the Old Testament we can read that in the beginning when God cre- ated the heavens and
the earth (Gen. A, 1), there is no reference to what existed before the creation of the universe by God,
because the question of what existed before the first cause has no meaning.
Certainly for Hesiod the Heaven and the Earth are the basic elements of the visible
universe, but they are not the first causes of cosmic creation. This cause is, according to
Hesiod, Chaos. In fact, we can see in Hesiod’s poems and in all ancient Greek cosmogo-
nies that there is no reference of any kind to a ‘personal God’ who creates the universe,
but rather what first takes place and what continues to happen later (through the whole
cosmogony) happens by its own power. This reflects the period in which the Pre-Socratic
philosophers (6th century BC) separated completely the myth from reason.
As we have already seen, Erevus and Nyx who have emerged from Chaos, generated Aether
and Imera (Day). Chaos also generated Eros, whose sense is definitely cosmological. Nyx
was also an important cosmological power, towards which even Zeus showed great re-
spect. Homer writes that Nyx was a consultant of Zeus in the creation of the universe
(Homer, Iliad 1919: XIV 259). Her power resulted from her old age and her clairvoyance.
So, in Theogony Chaos, Earth and Eros were the three primal basic elements through
which the universe came into being. Chaos is the receptor of every creation, while Earth
symbolizes the solid ground of all living creatures. Eros’ nature is totally different, be-
cause he is the force which leads everything to its regeneration.
Gigon (1968: 26) claims that the meaning of Eros is not just cosmological, because he is
a basic factor not only of human life, but of the entire cosmos. The late professor of
Philosophy at the University of Athens, Theophilos Veikos claims that the “human in the
early Greek thought is not an isolated part of the universe, but an integral part of the whole cosmos”
(Veikos 1988: 20).

4
In the Pre-Socratic philosophical thought several versions of expressing what existed
before the cosmic creation can be found. For example, Leucipus and Democritus believed
in the existence of a void. Anaxagoras spoke in favor of the existence of a mixture con-
taining the matter of the universe, while Anaximander spoke about the infinite. Also, the
lyric poet Alcman (7th century BC) claims that Chaos, keeping its original mythical char-
acteristics, takes form in the name of matter that gives birth to Thetis, the creator of the
universe (Kirk et al. 1983: 34, Danezis and Theodossiou 1999: 125-130).
Also, a very interesting aspect of the creation of the universe has been put forward by Plato, who in spite
of the fact that he does not speak clearly about Chaos, although he de- scribes the primitive situation of
matter as chaotic, which was formatted by the craftsman “He was good and the good can never be jealous
of anything. And being free from jeal- ousy, he desired that all things should be as similar to him as they
could be. This is in the truest sense the origin of creation and the world as we shall do well to believe in the
tes- timony of wise men. God decided that all things should be good and nothing bad, so far as this was
attainable. Wherefore also finding the whole visible sphere not at rest, but moving in an irregular and
disorderly fashion, out of disorder he drew order, consider- ing that this was in every way better than the
other” (Plato 1902, 30a, 2-6). So, the cos- mic creation consists of the change of matter from disorder into
order (Kalachanis 2011: 89-90). Aristotle just repeats the teachings of Hesiod about the creation of the
universe from Chaos (Aristotle Metaphysics, 984b, 28). Ovidius (Publius Ovidius Naso, 43 BC-17 AD)
also considers Chaos “a raw confused mass, nothing but inert matter, badly com- bined discordant atoms
of things, confused in one place” (Ovidius, 2002: lyr. 5-8).
Those cosmogonical aspects of ancient savants and also the meaning of the term “chaos” have contributed
to the perception of chaos as an infinite space, an abyss, or as unformed matter, from which the universe
evolved. The Professor Emeritus of Astronomy at the University of Thessaloniki, Nicolaos Spyrou, claims
that “a universe that emerges from Chaos represents the belief of ancient Greeks in an unpredictable Nature
which is ruled by eccentric gods. However, during the 6 th century BC in Ionia a new world view evolved,
according to which the Universe is understandable, because of its inner order; inside nature there are
regularities, which allow the exploration of its secrets and its op- erating principles. Nature is not
completely unpredictable, because of its regularities, the rules which it must obey. This orderly and
admirable aspect of the Universe was called Cosmos by the ancient Greeks, which means ornament,
decoration” (Spyrou 1998: 85).

THEORY OF CHAOS AND FRACTAL GEOMETRY

The late Ilya Prigogine (1917-2003), the ‘father’ of chaos theory and complexity wonders
whether there are any laws within chaos. So, is chaos non-predictable by definition?
Awarded the Nobel Prize in chemistry (1977) for his research in thermodynamics, he
considers that it is possible to include chaos in the laws of nature. So, he does not agree
with the view of chaos as a kind of a non-predictable disorder. According to the classic
view, physical law is deterministic, while the time is ‘reversible’, something which means
that the future and past play the same role.

Chaos expands our perception of the physical law by implying the importance of ‘pos-
sibility” and ‘irreversibility’. This radical change forces us to check again our basic de-
scription of nature. Deterministic laws produce seemingly random results. Or maybe God
‘by playing dice’ creates a deterministic universe governed by order. Using chaos theory
results in the development of a new branch of physics, which deals not only with laws, but
with a science that does not deny the evolution of modern scientific theories.
According to Barry Parker (1999), the Universe inspires admiration and a spontaneous
desire for research. We do not know whether we will be able to provide satisfactory an-
swers or not. Chaos Theory reminds us that unpredictability is a characteristic of our dy-
namic Universe. Chaos Theory along with Quantum theory and the theory of relativity are
among the most important scientific discoveries of the 20th century.

5
Attempts to describe the universe based on a deterministic model are opposed to the
physics of the 20th century, because determinism was refuted by Einstein’s theory of rela-
tivity or by Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. Scientists could not describe the physical
reality because of many chaotic parameters. Some examples of these parameters can be
seen in meteorological systems, in the eddies of the rivers, even in artificial systems, like
the stock exchange. In contrast with Laplace (Theodossiou 2008: 144), who claimed that
everything in nature is predictable provided that we know all the basic elements of physi-
cal procedures, the scientists of the 20th century admitted that they could not predict phe-
nomena like these. It is obvious that in such systems it is very difficult to know all the pa-
rameters, which can change at any time, as well as the hidden laws of nature. This is the
simple definition of a chaotic situation. However, the Greek word is used in a different
way in several cases. Thus, the term chaos has a different interpretation in Greek philoso-
phy than in everyday life or in Modern Greek (chaos means confusion or disorder), or in
its image of Mandelbrot sets (Mandelbrot, 1982). Also, the interpretation of chaos in sci-
ence is quite different.
Thus, chaos theory was developed, considered the third scientific revolution of phys- ics
in the 20th century, after relativity theory and quantum mechanics. Chaos theory is a
mathematical concept explaining that it is possible to get very different results from very
similar initial conditions of a system. The main precept behind this theory is the underly-
ing notion of small occurrences significantly affecting the outcomes of seemingly unre-
lated events. The new state that is being assumed by the chaotic system depends on the
mathematical concept of attractor. However, this new locus, in which the system will be
‘settled’ by the attractor, has parameters whose predictability cannot be described with
eternal deterministic laws. This concept of disorder has been the subject of scientific study
since the 1970s’.
Physicists, astronomers, mathematicians, meteorologists, biologists, chemists and
economists have been looking for connections among different types of non-normality.
After the first surprising results from the study of chaotic models, scientists attempted to
explain the chaotic movements of everyday life, such as weather conditions, the popula-
tion of wild animal species and fluctuations in stock prices. They recreated those uncon-
trollable phenomena with non-linear differential equations on computers. That is how
scientists discovered the hidden order that rules them, confirming the Pre-Socratic phi-
losopher Heraclitus, according to whom hidden harmony is better than obvious harmony
(Diels & Kranz, 1966, Β 54, 1).
Nowadays we know that chaos theory is based on the fact that chaos and uncertainty are
not due to the inability of technology, because they are basic characteristics of the
universe. Chaotic systems are very sensitive, because a tiny and difficult to observe detail
may cause a significant result, like the ‘butterfly effect’, according to which a butterfly in
China may cause a storm on the western coast of USA. Another example of a chaotic
system is the set of mathematical values of the four interactions of Universe (gravity,
electromagnetism, strong and weak nuclear forces). In the case that these values differed
minimally, the Universe would be extremely different. So, nature is a dynamical system
which could not be described by linear equations. Also, in the field of astronomy it is ad-
missible that chaos played an important role in the creation of the solar system. So, scien-
tists started examining the chaotic systems not just in theory, but as applied sciences.
Peculiar movements in chaotic systems create an odd mixture of tracks and swirls which does not seem
completely irregular. The American topologist Stephen Smale claimed that the most significant feature of
a dynamic system is its long time asymptotic behavior. This system chooses, through the entire system, a
simpler set of movements (as cited in Ian Stewart, 1998: 131). This repetitive behavior of a system finally
creates a ru- dimentary geometric form, called a ‘strange attractοr’ by mathematicians.

6
The support of chaos theory presupposed the proper mathematical model. This model was
finally created by fractal geometry, developed by the mathematician Benoit Β. Man-
delbrot (1924-2010).
A typical Mandelbrot fractal

Such an object’s basic feature is self-similarity, because it contains small patterns of itself,
in any scale it is examined. Observing the object at different scales, we see the original
object unfolded. Still, starting from a simple original object – just like a triangle – and
applying a simple geometric transformation continuously, we come to a fractal object of
great complexity which is obviously chaotic. Suddenly, chaos acquires order. Fractal
geometry proves to be very useful, to put order into chaos. Fractal structures were discov-
ered in seemingly chaotic systems, like the buffering of wind and snow, in galactic struc-
tures, in human organs such as lungs, brain and kidneys. Other examples of fractal sys-
tems include the distribution of forests on the Earth’s surface, in the shape of the coast-
line, in the formation of the bronchi of the lungs and also in the music of famous
composers, like Bach and Mozart. So, scientists speak now not of chaos and order, but of
a super- order, in which random and chaotic is everything we cannot describe or identify.
Those physical laws that rule such systems remain unknown. Therefore, according to
Plutarch, the oracle of Delphi correctly supported the view: “that God eternally
geometrizes” (Plutarch, Symposiakon 718 Β, 8).

REFERENCES
• Aristophanes (1928), Aves, ed. V. Coulon and M. van Daele, vol. 3, Les Belles Lettres, Paris
• Aristophanes (1968), Clouds, ed. K.J. Dover, Clarendon Press (repr. 1970), Oxford.
• Aristotle, Metaphysics, 1924, ed. W.D. Ross, 2 vols. Oxford, Clarendon Press (repr. 1970).
• Cook Arthur Bernard (1925), Zeus: A study in ancient religion, Cambridge University Press, vol. II, Appendix G, Cambridge,
p. 1051-1053.
• Danezis, E., Theodossiou E., et al. (1999), “A presocratic Cosmological Proposal”, Journal of the History and Heritage of
Astronomy (JAH2) 2(2):125-130.
• Danezis, Ε. and Theodossiou, Ε. (2003), The Cosmology of the mind – An Introduction to Cosmology,
Diavlos Publications, Athens, pp. 228-248 [in Greek].
• Diels, H. and Kranz, W. (1966). Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, vol. 1, Weidman, Berlin.
• Gigon, Ο. (1968), Der Ursprung der griecheischen Philosophie von Hesiod bis Parmenides, Basel, Stuttgard.
• Griaule, M. and Dieterlen, G. (1965), Le Renard Pâle. Vol. I, 1, 544. Institut d’Ethnologie. Musée de l’Homme, Palais de
Chaillot, Paris.
• Hesiod (1914), The Homeric Hymns and Homerica (Theogony). The Loeb Classical Library; English translation by Hugh G.
Evelyn-White, Heinemann, London (reprinted 1954).
• Hesiod (1914), Theogony of Hesiod, Heinemann, The Loeb Classical Library; English translation by Hugh G. Evelyn-White,
London (reprinted 1954).
• Homer (1924), The Iliad. The Loeb Classical Library; English translation by A.T. Murray, Heinemann, London (reprinted
1954).
• Homer (1919), The Odyssey. The Loeb Classical Library; English translation by A.T. Murray, revised by
G.E. Dimock, Heinemann, London (reprinted 1995).
• Jaeger, W. (1953), Die Theologie der frühen griecheischen Denker, Kohlhammer verlag, Stuttgard, p. 23.
• Kalachanis, Κ. (2011), On the Paradigm and the Icon in the work of John Philoponus, PhD Thesis, Department of Philosophy,
Paedagogics and Psychology, Department of Philosophy, University of Athens [in Greek].
• Kirk, G.S., Raven, J.E. and Schofield, M. (1983), The Presocratic Philosophers. A critical History with a selection of Texts,
Cambridge University Press, First printed (reprinted 1995), p. 34.
• Mandelbrot, B. Benoit (1982), The fractal geometry of nature, W.H. Freeman, New York.
• Orpheus (2007), Hymns, Ideotheatron Publications, Athens [in Greek].
• Orphica (1805), Ed. G. Hermannus, Fritsch, Lipsiae.
• Orphicorum Fragmenta (1922), Ed. O. Kern, Weidmann, Berlin.
• Ovidius (2002), Metamorhoses, translated in Greek from Latin voice, by the monk Maximus Planoudes, Academy of Athens,
Greek Library, Athens.
• Papathanasiou M. (October 2009), Phanes of Modena relief, Uranus, vol. 73: 296, [in Greek].
• Parker, B. (1999), Chaos and Astronomy, the impressive complexity of the universe, Trans by Theophanes Grammenos, Travlos
Publications, Athens.
• Plato (1902). Timaeus, Clarendon Press, Oxford (repr: 1968).
• Polites, N.G. (2004), Philosophimata, Athens [self-edited], [in Greek].
• Spyrou, Ν. (June 1998), Ionian Philosophy and Cosmic Science, Apoplous (Special edition), pp. 83-106 [in Greek].

7
• Stewart, Ι. (1998), Does God play dice?, Travlos Publications, Athens [in Greek].
• The Holy Bible (1979), The Gideons International. National Publishing Company, U.S.A.
• Theodossiou, E. (2007), The dethronement of the Earth – The dispute between geocentric and heliocentric system. Diavlos
Publications, Athens, p. 31 [in Greek].
• Theodossiou, E. (2008), Philosophy of Physics-From Descartes in the Theory of Everything, Diavlos Publications, Athens, p.
144, [in Greek].
• Veikos Th. (1988), The Presocratic Philosophers, I. Zacharopoulos Publications, Athens [in Greek].