You are basing your responses on the speculation that we will not be able extract the amount of information necessary to create an image based on what *you, personally* believe is possible.

I find that completely irrational and fallacious because as humanity has shown time and time again, limits fail to contain us.

I am also not sure you are well versed with the applications of the Inverse Square Law as I have been doing some reading on it this morning and it seems like you are speculating a lot.

A few hundred years ago, we couldn't get a clear picture of the moon. We have since been to the moon and back and have more high resolution photo's of the moon than we know what to do with.

We have also been able to detect cosmic background radiation whereas a few hundred years ago, we were unable to take a basic photograph. Today, we carry powerful camera's in our pockets. What do you think someone in the 1500's would say to you if you told them that one day you will have high resolution images of Saturn's rings, or that we would have a clear image of galaxies 13 billion years ago? Exactly.

What does this curve of progress and technology tell you?

That our images are becoming more clear and reaching into distances never believed possible, so how can you say for certain light will ever degrade beyond the point of object recognition when photon's do not decay, and when the Hubble Deep Field has proven otherwise? Also, if you haven't noticed, our planet is within a galaxy filled with countless sources of light. For the same reason we can clearly see galaxies in the deep field, we will one day be able to look into those galaxies themselves. Technology has proven that our images are only getting better.

Take a look at this if you are in any doubt.

http://io9.com/the-first-photo-of-the-orion-nebula-compared-to-one-tak-1535930753