Can a powerful telescope reveal the true limits of the universe's distance?

[Spin_Network]

If I look down into the Quantum Realm, things start to get "fuzzy", I cannot focus with clarity the objects I am observing, this is according to Quantum Approximations.

If I use a powerfull Telescope, such as a new generation "Hubble Lens?", will I see the farthest objects with more or less clarity?

If I scale both process to a calibrated distance, one for the Quantum limit of fuzzyness from an experimental measure apperatus, and then perform the same calibrated exersize on a Macro measure Apperatus, then if the Laws of Nature are independant of scale, it should produce a macro scale that I cannot observe with any clarity?

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/quantum_bits_030402.html

 

[SpaceTiger]

The basic gist of this article is that some authors of theories of quantum gravity had been speculating that there would be loss of phase information as photons passed through the quantum foam. This effect would only be noticable over very large distances, but some people expected to see it in the HST high-z images. Although the article seems to suggest that it's a problem with a "fundamental aspect of quantum theory", I wouldn't be throwing away your QM textbooks just yet. The accompanying paper (at least, my best guess to it) can be found here:

Ragazzoni et al. 2003

It seems to indicate that the phenomenon was only predicted by some theories of quantum gravity, all of which fall into the highly speculative regime at the moment. That, coupled with the fact that the article only has eight citations, would lead me to suggest caution in one's interpretation of the accompanying popular article.

 

[Spin_Network]

The basic gist of this article is that some authors of theories of quantum gravity had been speculating that there would be loss of phase information as photons passed through the quantum foam. This effect would only be noticable over very large distances, but some people expected to see it in the HST high-z images. Although the article seems to suggest that it's a problem with a "fundamental aspect of quantum theory", I wouldn't be throwing away your QM textbooks just yet. The accompanying paper (at least, my best guess to it) can be found here:

Ragazzoni et al. 2003

It seems to indicate that the phenomenon was only predicted by some theories of quantum gravity, all of which fall into the highly speculative regime at the moment. That, coupled with the fact that the article only has eight citations, would lead me to suggest caution in one's interpretation of the accompanying popular article.

Thanks ST, I am just curious for something I am struggling with at the moment, whilst I asked myself the question posted here, I found the above link, so it seems to have been asked before.

My initial query was in part, to do with the 'far-off' Luminocity Function, but again thanks for the clarity in you reply.

 

[Chronos]

Agreed, don't toss those QT books just yet. It works well in the big picture. So does GR. It's just a matter of scale at the moment. Unification may be staring us in the face. I really like Smolin's [and a few others] approach... Hey, if we all put our heads together [and differences aside], we might come up with a really good idea!