<p>No, the expansion of the universe appears to be accelerating. Hence distant objects get more and more red-shifted. Our horizon is shrinking instead of expanding. At the end, only galaxies which are sufficiently bound by gravity remain visible; this could turn out to be the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_supercluster" rel="nofollow">Virgo supercluster</a>.</p>

<p>More reading about the accelerating universe on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerating_universe" rel="nofollow">Wikipedia</a>, and on <a href="http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/10/111004-nobel-prize-physics-universe-expansion-what-is-dark-energy-science/" rel="nofollow">National Geographic</a>.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2011/advanced-physicsprize2011.pdf" rel="nofollow">Scientific background to the according Nobel Prize in physics 2011</a>.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-03-01T16:22:01.323Z
Is that already proven? It's kinda scary...
Tomáš Zato
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-03-01T18:42:58.820Z
@TomášZato It's the current main stream opinion, mainly based on supernova Ia observations, worth a Nobel's Prize. You can never exclude a systematic error with absolute certainty, but it's unlikely that such an error would be large enough to lead to a fundamentally different result.
Gerald
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-03-01T15:50:02.450Z
2014-03-01T19:01:43.820Z
2014-03-01T19:01:43.820Z
Gerald
<p>I would assume that, with light from more distant areas in space reaching the earth, we should be able to see more distant (and older) objects.<br>
However there's lot of <a href="https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/q/1860/1135">weird stuff regarding the space expansion</a> that could eventually make the objects leaving us so fast the we'd never see them.</p>

<p>So, did we reach any boundary of what we can possibly see, or are we still working on more sensitive exploration devices?</p>

<p><sub>I'll be grateful for some useful re-tag</sub></p>

<expansion><dark-energy><cosmological-horizon>
Do more objects appear on sky in time?
Tomáš Zato
# Do more objects appear on sky in time?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2014-03-01)

I would assume that, with light from more distant areas in space reaching the earth, we should be able to see more distant (and older) objects.  
However there's lot of [weird stuff regarding the space expansion](https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/q/1860/1135) that could eventually make the objects leaving us so fast the we'd never see them.

So, did we reach any boundary of what we can possibly see, or are we still working on more sensitive exploration devices?

I'll be grateful for some useful re-tag

**Tags:** expansion, dark-energy, cosmological-horizon


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2014-03-01. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

No, the expansion of the universe appears to be accelerating. Hence distant objects get more and more red-shifted. Our horizon is shrinking instead of expanding. At the end, only galaxies which are sufficiently bound by gravity remain visible; this could turn out to be the [Virgo supercluster](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_supercluster).

More reading about the accelerating universe on [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerating_universe), and on [National Geographic](http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/10/111004-nobel-prize-physics-universe-expansion-what-is-dark-energy-science/).

[Scientific background to the according Nobel Prize in physics 2011](http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2011/advanced-physicsprize2011.pdf).

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Is that already proven? It's kinda scary...  
> **username_1**: @TomášZato It's the current main stream opinion, mainly based on supernova Ia observations, worth a Nobel's Prize. You can never exclude a systematic error with absolute certainty, but it's unlikely that such an error would be large enough to lead to a fundamentally different result.  

---

