Okay, let's see. I need to figure out how the number of stars in a certain region of the sky changes with distance. The question says that the number of stars varies with parallax as 1/plx^5. Hmm, parallax is related to distance, right? Parallax (plx) is inversely proportional to distance (d), so plx = 1/d. Wait, but I should check that. Oh yeah, parallax is approximately 1/d when the distance is in parsecs and parallax is in arcseconds. So if plx = 1/d, then d = 1/plx. 

The number of stars is given as proportional to 1/plx^5. But since d is 1/plx, substituting that in, the number of stars would be proportional to 1/(1/d)^5, which simplifies to d^5. So the number of stars increases with d^5. But wait, the question is asking how the number of stars changes with distance per unit range. Hmm, maybe I need to think about differential elements here because the question mentions "per unit range of distance, r". 

Let me recall. The number of stars in a volume element is typically related to the density. The density of stars in the sky (well, in space) usually decreases with distance. But here, the problem is about how the number of stars varies with parallax. Let's think in terms of volume. The number of stars in a spherical shell at distance d with thickness dr is approximately 4πd²n(r) dr, where n(r) is the number density of stars at distance d. 

But the problem gives the number of stars as a function of parallax, which is 1/d. So if the number of stars N is proportional to 1/(plx)^5, substituting plx = 1/d gives N ∝ d^5. But that's the total number of stars up to distance d. Wait, no. Wait, the problem states "the number of stars varies with parallax as 1/plx^5". So maybe it's the number per unit parallax, or the number density in terms of parallax. Hmm, the wording is a bit ambiguous. Let me parse the question again.

The question says: "the number of stars varies with parallax as 1/plx^5". So for each parallax value, the number of stars is inversely proportional to plx^5. But parallax is 1/d, so plx = 1/d. So substituting, the number of stars at a given parallax (which corresponds to a specific distance) is proportional to (d)^5. But wait, that would mean that as distance increases, the number of stars at that exact distance increases with d^5. But that doesn't make sense because the density of stars should decrease with distance. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the setup.

Alternatively, perhaps the number of stars per unit parallax interval is proportional to 1/plx^5. Let's think of it as a differential. If we have dN/dplx ∝ 1/plx^5. Then, integrating over parallax would give the total number of stars. Let's see. If dN/dplx = k/plx^5, then integrating from plx_min to plx_max would give N = ∫k/plx^5 dplx = -k/(4 plx^4) evaluated from plx_min to plx_max. But this would give N proportional to 1/plx^4 evaluated between limits, but I'm not sure if that's the right approach here.

Wait, maybe the problem is considering the number density as a function of parallax. So if the number of stars per unit parallax is 1/plx^5, then since parallax is 1/d, the number of stars per unit distance (dr) would be proportional to the number per unit parallax times the derivative of parallax with respect to distance. Because dr = -d/dplx (since plx = 1/d, so d = 1/plx, and dr/dplx = -1/(plx^2)). So the number density in terms of dr would be dN/dr = dN/dplx * dplx/dd * dd/dr = (1/plx^5) * (-plx^2) = -1/plx^3. But since we take absolute value, it's 1/plx^3. But plx is 1/d, so substituting back, we get dN/dr = d^3. So the number density of stars per unit distance is proportional to d^3. Therefore, the number of stars in a shell between d and d+dr is proportional to d^3 dr. So integrating this from 0 to some D would give the total number of stars up to distance D as ∫ d^3 dr from 0 to D, which is (D^4)/4. So the total number of stars N(D) ∝ D^4. 

Wait, but the question asks how the number of stars in that region of the sky changes with distance per unit range of distance. So the rate of change dN/dr is proportional to d^3, which is option D: ~r^3. So the answer should be D. But let me check again.

Alternatively, maybe the problem is considering the number of stars as a function of parallax. If N(plx) ∝ 1/plx^5, then since plx = 1/d, N(d) ∝ d^5. So the number of stars at distance d is proportional to d^5. But the question is about per unit range of distance. So the rate of change of N with respect to distance would be dN/dd = derivative of d^5 with respect to d, which is 5d^4. But that's the total number up to distance d. Wait, but the question is about per unit distance, which would be the density, so dN/dr = 5d^4. Which is proportional to d^4. But that's not matching the options. Wait, maybe I'm mixing up the total and the density.

Wait, the problem states "the number of stars varies with parallax as 1/plx^5". So for a given parallax, the number of stars is 1/plx^5. But the number of stars per unit parallax would be the derivative of N with respect to plx. If N(plx) is proportional to 1/plx^5, then dN/dplx = -5/plx^6. But since plx = 1/d, the number of stars per unit parallax is -5/(1/d)^6 = -5 d^6. But this seems off. Maybe I'm overcomplicating.

Alternatively, perhaps the problem is saying that the surface density (number per unit area) of stars varies with parallax as 1/plx^5. But that's not what it says. The question says "the number of stars varies with parallax as 1/plx^5". So if you plot N vs. plx, it's a power law with exponent -5. But since plx is 1/d, we can write N(d) ∝ 1/(1/d)^5 = d^5. So the number of stars as a function of distance is proportional to d^5. But the question is asking how the number of stars changes with distance per unit range. So the rate of change of N with respect to distance would be dN/dd = 5d^4. But the problem is asking for the number of stars per unit distance, which is the number density. However, this would mean the number density is proportional to d^4, which is not one of the options. Wait, the options are A: r^4, B: r^5, C: r^2, D: r^3. So if the number density is d^4, that would be option A. But earlier, when considering the differential approach, I thought the number density was d^3. Hmm, conflicting results.

Wait, maybe I need to approach this from first principles. Let's consider that the number of stars in a spherical shell at distance d with thickness dr is dN = 4πd²n(d) dr, where n(d) is the number density at distance d. The problem states that the number of stars varies with parallax as 1/plx^5. So if parallax is 1/d, then 1/plx^5 = d^5. So the total number of stars up to distance D would be ∫ from 0 to D of 4πd² * n(d) dd = ∫ from 0 to D of (d^5) dd = (D^6)/6. Therefore, the total number of stars N(D) = (D^6)/6. Then the number density n(d) = d^5 * (4π)/(4π d²) = d^3. Wait, because dN/dd = 4πd²n(d) = d^5. So solving for n(d): n(d) = d^5 / (4πd²) = d^3/(4π). So the number density is proportional to d^3. Therefore, the number of stars per unit distance (per unit range) is proportional to d^3. So the correct answer is D. 

But wait, the problem states "the number of stars varies with parallax as 1/plx^5". So if the number per unit parallax is 1/plx^5, then the number per unit distance would be the derivative of the total number with respect to distance. Let's clarify. Let’s denote N(plx) as the number of stars per unit parallax. Then, since plx = 1/d, dN/dd = dN/dplx * dplx/dd = (1/plx^5) * (-1/plx²) = -1/(plx^7). But plx = 1/d, so substituting back, dN/dd = -1/(1/d)^7 = -d^7. But this seems contradictory. Maybe I'm mixing up the definitions.

Alternatively, if the star count is 1/plx^5 per unit parallax, then the total number up to some parallax plx_max is ∫ from plx_min to plx_max of 1/plx^5 dplx. Let’s say plx_min approaches zero. Then the total number N would be ∫ (from 0 to plx_max) dplx / plx^5 = [ -1/(4 plx^4) ] from 0 to plx_max = -1/(4 plx_max^4) + 1/0 → which diverges, which doesn't make sense. So perhaps the problem is not referring to the total number but the surface density or something else.

Alternatively, maybe the problem is considering the number density as a function of parallax. If the number density per unit parallax is 1/plx^5, then since parallax is 1/d, the number density per unit distance would be 1/(1/d)^5 * (d/d distance of parallax). Wait, the derivative of parallax with respect to distance is d(plx)/dd = -1/d². So the number density in terms of distance is (number per unit parallax) * (parallax in terms of distance) = 1/(1/d)^5 * (-1/d²) = d^5 * (-1/d²) = -d^3. Ignoring the negative sign (since we're considering magnitude), the number density is proportional to d^3. Therefore, the number of stars per unit distance is proportional to d^3. So the answer is D. 

This aligns with the previous calculation. Therefore, the correct answer should be D. ~r^3.
</think>