The daily morning journal and courier., 1904-12-03

which light would require sixty-six hundred years to travel.
 The inquiring reader may here ask another question. Granting that all the stars we can see are contained within this limit. may there not be any number of stars without the limit which are invisible only because they are too far away to be seen?
 This question may be answered quite definitely if we grant that light from the most distant stars meets with no obstruction in reaching us. The most conclusive answer is afforded by the measure of starlight. If the stars extended out indefinitely. then the number of those of each order of mag nitude would be nearly four times that of the magnitude next brighter. For example, we should have nearly four times as many stars of the sixth mag nitude as of the fifth; nearly four times as many of the seventh as of the sixth, and so on indefinitely. Now, it is ac- tualiy found that while this ratio of in crease is true for the brighter stars, it is not so for the fainter ones, and that the increase in the number of the lat ter rapidly falls off when we make count of the fainter telescopic stars. In fact, it has long been known that, were the universe infinite in extent and the stars equally scattered through all space, the whole heavens would blaze with the light of countless millions of distant stars separately invisible even with the telescope.
 "The only way in which this conclu- sion can be invalidated is by the possi- bility that the light of the stars is in some way extinguished or obstructed in { its passage through space. A theory to this effect was propounded by StruYe nearly century ago, but it has since been found that the facts as he set them forth do not justify the conclu- sion, which was, in fact. rather hypo- thetical The theories of modern sci- ence converge toward the view that, in the pure ether of space no single ray Of 1 light can ever be lost, no matter how far it may travel. But there is another possible cause for the existence of light. During the last few years dis coveries of dark and therefore invisi- ble stars have been made by means of the spectroscope with a success which would have been quite incredible a very 1 few years ago, and which even to-day must excite wonder and admiration.
 The general conclusion is that, besides
 the shining stars which exist in space, there may be any number of dark ones, l forever invisible in our telescopes.
 May 1t not be that these bodies are so
 numerous as to cut off the light which we would otherwise receive from the more distant bodies of the universe
 It is of course impossible to answer
 this question in positive way, but the probable conclusion is a negative one.
 We may say with certainty that dark stars are not so numerous as to cut off any importaht part of the light from ! the stars of the Milky Way, because, Eff they did, the latter would not be so clearly seen as 1t is. Since we have
 reason to believe that the Milky Way comprises the more distant stars of our
 system, we may feel fairly confident
 that not. much light can be cut off by dark bodies from the most distant re-
 zion to which our telescopes can pene-
 trate. Up to this distance we see the
 stars just as they are. Even within the limit of the universe as we under
 stand 1t. 1t Is likely that more than
 one-half the stars which actually exist
 are too faint to be seen by human vi-
 sion, even when armed with the most powerful telescope But their invisi-
 bility is due only to their distance and tthe faintness of their intrinsic light, and mot to any obstructing agency. Pro- lessor simon Newcomb in Harper's ! Magazine