Hi everyone, I recently read an essay by Isaac Asimov called "Figure of the Farthest", which discussed the ideas on size of the universe across history. One of the basic ideas of that essay was that, since objects move away from us at increasing speeds the farther they are, then when you observe an object that is moving away from us at a speed close to that of light, then you would effectively be seeing the 'edge of the universe' (the observable universe, at least). In this essay, Asimov claimed that there could be many other objects beyond that edge, but we would never be able to see them because they move away from us faster than the speed of light. He then said that the "nothing can travel faster than the speed of light" claim is just a "simplification". The correct statement is that, every time you measure the speed of some object, it will always be lower than the speed of light. So my question is, is all of this correct? I haven't been able to find any discussion about this, and nobody claiming that it's a simplification to say that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. Is it possible that there are things that travel faster than the speed of light, but just can't be observed because their light (or radiations or whatever) never reach us? Thank you very much.