"Astronomers have pushed NASA's Hubble Space Telescope to its limits by finding what is likely to be the most distant object ever seen in the universe. The object's light traveled 13.2 billion years to reach Hubble, roughly 150 million years longer than the previous record holder. The age of the universe is approximately 13.7 billion years."
The next generation of telescopes may be interesting in confirming or refuting Big Bang. There are alternate theories, like the minority who think the universe has simply always existed in various forms but much as it is today.
So if your telescopes get good enough to see further than 14 million light years (more than the supposed age of the universe), you would disprove Big Bang (but not relativity). At the rate of advance in space telescopes, we could do this in a decade or so. After all, Hubble was very limited to begin with.
Falsifiability is an essential element of science. This is likely a way to put Big Bang to the test.
So if your telescopes get good enough to see further than 14 million light years (more than the supposed age of the universe), you would disprove Big Bang (but not relativity).
Not necessarily. It would either disprove the Big Bang OR disprove the estimated age of the universe. (That only after proving your image shows something more than 13.7 billion light years away).
Of course there may well be a few other potential explanations to make everything fit together as well. I think the current theory is that the laws of physics were different shortly after the big bang. If so, then it will be hard to draw many conclusions from any set of evidence.
"The object's light traveled 13.2 billion years to reach Hubble"
So if that object was a galaxy, and you lived in that galaxy, what would you observe looking away from our galaxy? What if you launched a probe into that undefined nothingness?
