and hence the more stars we see. The fact that the increase in the
number of stars seen towards the equatorial region of the system
is greater, the smaller the stars, is the natural consequence of
the fact that distant stars come within our view in greater
numbers towards the equatorial than towards the polar regions.

Objections have been raised to the Herschelian view on the ground
that it assumes an approximately uniform distribution of the stars
in space. It has been claimed that the fact of our seeing more
stars in one direction than in another may not arise merely from
our looking through a deeper stratum, as Herschel supposed, but
may as well be due to the stars being more thinly scattered in the
direction of the axis of the system than in that of its equatorial
region. The great inequalities in the richness of neighboring
regions in the Milky Way show that the hypothesis of uniform
distribution does not apply to the equatorial region. The claim
has therefore been made that there is no proof of the system
extending out any farther in the equatorial than in the polar
direction.

The consideration of this objection requires a closer inquiry as
to what we are to understand by the form of our system. We have
already pointed out the impossibility of assigning any boundary
beyond which we can say that nothing exists. And even as regards a
boundary of our stellar system, it is impossible for us to assign
any exact limit beyond which no star is visible to us. The analogy
of collections of stars seen in various parts of the heavens leads
us to suppose that there may be no well-defined form to our
system, but that, as we go out farther and farther, we shall see
occasional scattered stars to, possibly, an indefinite distance.