How much more could hubbel see if it were say orbiting Mars? Saturn? Neptun? and Beyond? I guess this could be a question apperature vs distance?

I don't believe that this is true.

Start with a simple example, although admittedly it's not a physical example. The real number line only has one "2". Even though there are infinite possibilities, "2" only appears once.

A "sort of" related, almost physical thing is Penrose Tiling.

Now to try to get to a more physical example. Suppose that the infinite universe is partitioned into some sort of regions, of any size that you like. Further suppose that what ultimately happens in that region is dependent on some set of random numbers. If those random numbers are continuous, then it's almost impossible for there to be a repeat. However even if we suppose that the random numbers are finite, or must occur within some sort of range, then there's always the possibility that one of them will occur only once.

Lest you say, "sure but that's really unlikely", consider the fact that your "rolling the dice" analogy implies independent events.

If we're talking about a spatially infinite universe, it seems that it would be difficult to consider these random numbers to be independent. If we're talking about some sort of infinite universe occurring temporally based on decisions, then there's also some sort of correlation, and again the variables are not independent.

In any case, I'm reasonably sure that you can't say that an infinite universe implies that anything that can happen, does happen, multiple times.

As a layman, so not conversant with the actual stuff, my naive first reaction was "but what about entropy leaking back to the universe as the BH evaporates?" But then I guess that if you continue throw energetic observers into the BH, it won't evaporate as fast.

If the BH radiates back, so making up for available energy states (of entropy), I guess there must be a trade off between preserving holography and evaporation somehow. Maybe a too small observer will be unsure if holography holds.

Or maybe that "quantum bit" stuff I try to preserve is simply faulty. After all information is both relative a system and some measure, rather limited usefulness if you ask me, while plain old entropy is merely relative a system (ie always stat phys measured as "density of available energy levels"). Is there "BH information" and "normal information", perchance?

LC