Total stars in Universe is rougly equal to the total number (ever) of human cells.

[Anomalocaris]

No, you misunderstand the conclusion science is drawing.  We have not seen the light from the furthest reaches of the universe that exists.  We’ve seen the light from the furthest reaches of the universe whose light had Time to reach us..

Do you understand the difference?

Light takes time to travel.

No I'm not misunderstanding, I've heard scientist say we have seen light from the end of the universe. I do understand light travels at 186,000 MPs

No. Not the end of the universe in space.  You are seeing the light from near the beginning of the universe in time.  Ask those scientists to clarify and not try to fit their words which you clearly understands in only the vaguest terms into your preconceived notions,

Multiple lines of evidence shows the Universe is approximately 13.5 billion years old.   The very earliest light in the universe only had 13.5 billion years to travel.   Therefore we can not see any light that originated from further away than the distance light can travel in 13.5 billion years.  

Understood?

Yes I understand quite well, light has been traveling for 13.5 billion years in a universe that's 13.5 billion years old, the light from the edge of the universe has had time to get here. However we have no real idea of our position in the universe so we could be 13.5 billion light years from some point on the edge of the universe and much less at some other point, unless you believe we are at the exact center of the universe.

Exact center?

Think about this.  

If you are in a field a mile square bounded on all sides by fences on a cloudy day.   You can only see 100 yards. Do you need to be at the exact center to see exactly the same thing in all direction and see no fence anywhere in any direction.

The spherical part of space with we at the center and extending outwards in every direction by a distance equal to how far light can travel in 13.5 billion years is the part of the universe that we can observe.  That is called the observable universe.  We may have seen the furthest reach of the observable universe.   Do not confuse the entire observable universe with the entire universe.

Just what makes yo believe we are more than 13.5 billion light years from some edge of the universe, why can't we be much closer than that to some points on the edge of the universe. Just what would the edge look like anyhow, would we actually recognize the edge. Much of the outer reaches of the universe are speculation only, most of what scientist believe has never been observed.

The edge would look like no more stars or galaxies beyond?

If the farthest you can see is 10 billion light years but the oldest stuff at 10 billion light years already exhibit evidence of being 3 billion years old, then you might have see the edge?

If you can see back 13.5 billion years, but you can see the stuff way out 13.5 billion light years from us is clustered in a way that suggest they won’t evolve into something similar to where we are now, that suggest the universe is. It homogenous and somewhere near where things start to get different there might be an edge?

We found that the universe does not become significantly different when you get closer to the edge of observable universe.   If the entire universe is the same size as the observable universe, or if the entire universe is only somewhat bigger than the observable universe, then the furtherest parts we can see would be much closer to true edge of the universe.   Any parts of the universe that is near to any true edge would experience forces and development significantly differently from our part.  So they should look different.   But to the furthest we can see, the universe does not look different.  So if the universe has an edge, it is no where close to the furthest reaches we can see.

Understood?

Like I said above it's all speculation when you get to those distances, for all we know those objects that far out do not exist, they could have been destroyed or what ever else might happen to them a billion years ago and we would have no clue, the edge of the universe could be rushing in on us and we would not even know it.

We indeed do not know for sure what exactly happened subsequently to any particular object whose light from 13.5 billion years we are just seeing now.   Your point is?

The point here is by looking back through 13.5 billion years, we are actually looking through an entire depth of time 13.5 billion years deep, not just one point 13.5 billion years ago.   In broad strokes, what we see at each snapshot during the 13.5 billion years coupled with our understanding of physics let’s us summarize how things change through time during the last 13.5 billion years on a statistical basis.  We can extraopolate, again on a statistical basis, whether any part of what we see through the depth of time and distance from us exhibits evidence of not being on the same development tradjectory as all the rest.

So all we see suggest what we are looking at 13.5 billion years ago at a distance that would take light 13.5 billion years to traverse looks very much like what we think our part of the universe would have looked like 13.5 billion years ago.  Everything in between also looked like they would fit on the same continuous development path as everything else.

So we see no region on very large scale, outwards from us in distance or backwards in time, to suggest that region is significantly different from the region near us, or any other region we see.

So to the farthest in distances and farthest back in time, the universe seems homogenous.

Understood?

We don’t know exactly how far the universe extends beyond the furthest reach we can see.  We believe evidence point to it extend quite a long ways further.  For all we know, it could spatially go on forever.  

Understood?

It only makes sense that it never ends, just what would be on the other side of an expanding universe, nothing? Is there nothingness, I hardly think so. Besides that, if the Big Band is true the the universe can't go on forever now can it, it would have to expand until the energy runs out, unless you want to purpose that more energy can somehow be created to continue the push.

otherside?  You hardly think so?   Who is you?  How much have you done to understand the complexity and basis of modern cosmology?

Do you not understand the universe is everything and there is no otherside.  Everything is getting further apart.  If there is something outside everything then everything is not everything, is it now.

Now the furtherest reaches we can see, although huge by human scale, is finite in size.  That part was much smaller, the size of Walnut, at a moment very close to the beginning.  

But the Walnut is just what will become the part of the universe that will be within the distance from us that light can cover in 13.5 billion years.  The entire universe is much bigger than that part whose light could reach us within 13.5 billion years.

So when our observable universe was the size of a Walnut, the entire universe was much larger proportion, just as the entire universe now is much bigger than the on]bservable universe now.

If the entire universe is infinite in spatial extent now, it was probably infinite in spatial extent back then.

Understood?

 You nor anyone else can know that there was always more to the universe than what was contained in that small package of material at the moment of the beginning of the expansion. No one knows how large the universe truly is nor will we ever know. Your last statement is an impossibility, you want to have your cake and eat it too. 

Of coarse you do know I do not believe in the Big Bang and I have sever reservations on what is being observed in the outer reaches of the universe, I have many reservations about what is said about our own galaxy. I am a creationist who believes an infinite eternal God created this universe and still has full control over it and I that the universe He created is infinite. do i have proof it's infinite, no more than you have proof that the universe is 13.5 billion years old. But why would God create a universe that wasn't as infinite as He is, and because he is infinite and eternal he would need a universe to be the same to hold Him. In my opinion the only way this created universe is not infinite would be if God actually resides in another dimension. Like most things man has to speculate on those things he can not understand and the size of the universe is one of those things and God is another.

GC

Ah yes.  No one can know because I am too small, too unimaginative, too misantropicto conceive of how the wisdom of others through unstinting effort can expand human vision and understanding there, therefore my favorite fantasy rules?