MoNCK— 2y?e Distribution of the Stars in Space. 475 



But though the set does not vanish, it must contain a much smaller 

 number of stars than the 740 afforded by the theory — probably not 

 half that number. After such a check in the arithmetical compu- 

 tation as this, I did not think it necessary to proceed any farther. 

 The result, however, strikingly confirms my former conclusion as 

 to the great richness of the region of stars immediately beyond that 

 through which we are travelling. 



The third mode of looking at the problem would be much the 

 most satisfactory if we possessed the requisite data for applying it, 

 but unfortunately we do not, nor are we likely to do so for a very 

 long period. This method would consist in taking the 20 nearest 

 stars as our first set ; the 140 nearest to them as our second set ; the 

 380 next in point of nearness as the third set, and so on ; and then 

 to compare the light of the several sets as thus determined. But 

 to go no farther than the first set, what astronomer would venture 

 to specify the 20 stars. that are nearest to us? While, however, 

 we thus lack the requisite data, we can see in a general way the 

 kind of effect that would be produced by substituting the nearest 

 for the brightest stars in arranging our successive sets. Tiie light of 

 the first set would be reduced. Several stars of the first magnitude 

 would be excluded from it, and their places taken by stars of much 

 inferior brightness, such as 6 and 61 Cygni. In fact the leading 

 20 would probably include four or five stars of a magnitude not 

 superior to the sixth. Probably the light of the second set would 

 also be reduced, but not to the same extent. Several stars of the 

 second and third magnitude would, no doubt, be excluded from it, 

 and their places taken by fainter stars. But as a set-off we should 

 find included in it several first-magnitude stars among them, per- 

 haps such giants as Canopus, Wega, and Areturus. The relative 

 preponderance of the second set over the first would thus be in- 

 creased. Somewhat similar observations will apply to the subse- 

 quent sets. Each would contain many stars of inferior magnitudes 

 to those assumed in my Table, but they would also contain many 

 stars of superior magnitudes; and probably by the time that we 

 reached the tenth or twelfth set, the brighter and fainter stars thus 

 introduced would balance each other, and the average brightness 

 would be sensibly the same as in the Table. If further researches 

 should show that the steady decline in the total light of each set 

 continues below the point where this equivalence may be supposed 



