But that does not justify it. That there is one star after another, the hypothesis of a uniform distribution (at that time there was no reason to think of a more privileged place, more filled with stars elsewhere) allows the existence of stars “next door”. In this formal language, stars are “dense” in the celestial sphere. Only after Vesto Slipher, Hubble and others discovered in the second decade of this century that the universe was expanding could he give a satisfactory explanation of the paradox. the expansion of the universe is the redshift of all wavelengths. This means, among other things, that there is a loss of energy with distance; that is, there is an "additional" loss of brightness proportional to 1/r. More distant, less bright than it was even in a static universe. But what really resolves the paradox is the same expansion. If the universe is expanding, it is because it is not infinite. It is neither in space nor in time, so we can only consider a finite number of spherical shells. Finitude is the key. It is true that all shells together bring shine, but only in sufficient quantity to leave the night as it is....