This library is built in the open.
If you spot an error, have a suggestion, or just want to say hello — we’d love to hear from you.

distinctions already drawn and then explain the ‘milky way’ and comets and the other phenomena akin to these. 35
339^b Fire, air, water, earth, we assert, originate from one another, and each of them exists potentially in each, as all things do that can be resolved into a common and ultimate substrate.
The first difficulty is raised by what is called the air. What are we to take its nature to be in the world surrounding the earth? And what is its position relatively to 5 the other physical elements. (For there is no question as to the relation of the bulk of the earth to the size of the bodies which exist around it, since astronomical demonstrations have by this time proved to us that it is actually far smaller than some individual stars. As for the water, it is not observed to exist collectively and separately, nor can 10 it do so apart from that volume of it which has its seat about the earth: the sea, that is, and rivers, which we can see, and any subterranean water that may be hidden from our observation.) The question is really about that which lies between the earth and the nearest stars. Are we to consider it to be one kind of body or more than one? 15 And if more than one, how many are there and what are the bounds of their regions?
We have already described and characterized the first element, and explained that the whole world of the upper motions is full of that body.
This is an opinion we are not alone in holding: it 20 appears to be an old assumption and one which men have held in the past, for the word ether the shining or upper sky has long been used to denote that element. Anaxagoras a pre-Socratic Greek philosopher, it is true, seems to me to think that the word means the same as fire. For