Astronomy / Space MOND, or the end of Dark Matter

Iskariot

Iskariot
I already mentioned this in another thread, but I feel for those interested in this topic a new thread will less likely be overlooked.

In the New Scientist of this month (May 3d) there is an article about MOND or Modified Newtonian Dynamics which supposedly dismisses the need for the Dark Matter theory with one single elegant formula.
The article is titled: "It is time to give up on dark matter".

I would upload the two pages if I could, but I just can't do it on this forum for some reason.


I just realized this should have been in the astronomy forum perhaps?
 
Last edited:

Dinosawer

Dinosawer
Well I already answered to you in the other thread, but ok.
Repeat:
MoND being a perfect solution for the problem? Not really. For galaxies yes, but for galaxy clusters not. Read the Wikipedia article on MoND, especially the last part of "consistency with observations" and the "criticisms" part, it's far from a perfect theory (as is dark matter, obviously). So the dark matter problem is far from solved.
 

Iskariot

Iskariot
Dinosawer said:
Well I already answered to you in the other thread, but ok.
Repeat:
MoND being a perfect solution for the problem? Not really. For galaxies yes, but for galaxy clusters not. Read the Wikipedia article on MoND, especially the last part of "consistency with observations" and the "criticisms" part, it's far from a perfect theory (as is dark matter, obviously). So the dark matter problem is far from solved.
Click to expand...

Well, the scientist Mordehai Milgrom does not seem to see a problem. He states that MOND´s predictions have been vindicated in dozens of cases already and there seems to be an increasing interest in the theory now.

It really is impossible for me to actually judge anything of this as I am not a physicist myself, but there seems to be brewing something interesting here.
 

Bumvelcrow

Bumvelcrow
Meh, this is turning into a religious debate, with neither side having any concrete evidence. Personally I have a soft spot for MoND as it doesn't require conjuring undetected particles, but they're both just theories at the moment. No, forget that, I don't like dark matter and am easily drawn into arguments about it.

Cosmologists, eh, a different breed. :D

B
 

Daeron

Daeron
Dark Matter is like those Dragons they had on the edges of the map, it is not a strange development. But always a little sad to see the exotic elements of the unknown world disappear. What shall we do without labels like "Here be Dark Matter". Ah well. We still have the Black Holes. I hope. ;)
 

Dinosawer

Dinosawer
Iskariot said:
Well, the scientist Mordehai Milgrom does not seem to see a problem. He states that MOND´s predictions have been vindicated in dozens of cases already and there seems to be an increasing interest in the theory now.

It really is impossible for me to actually judge anything of this as I am not a physicist myself, but there seems to be brewing something interesting here.
Click to expand...

Well, you see, scientists are people too. There isn't enough evidence to say what is the right theory, and people who support one theory will sometimes gloss over the points where their theory fails. ;)
In short:
The weaknesses of dark matter are that it's stuff we can't detect and don't know what it is or where it comes from, and it also predicts some stuff slightly less accurately than MoNd
The weaknesses of MoNd are that it still predicts that galaxy clusters should fly apart (they don't) and that gravity is still centered on places where we see matter, whereas we have already seen a situation where a cloud of gas is trailing behind a cloud of nothing (this is a great point towards dark matter)

I personally wait and see, both theories are interesting (although I hope MoNd is wrong because the calculations are more tedious :D Just kidding)

MoNd is already thirty years old, by the way. :)
 
Last edited:

Bumvelcrow

Bumvelcrow
Iskariot said:
Not in this thread I hope.
I have nothing invested in any of the theories.
I am just very interested in stuff like this and for some reason never heard about MOND before.
Click to expand...

No, we're all extremely open minded! I'm sure I heard about MoNd when I was at university a while ago. It's one of those theories that goes against the grain of prevailing opinion. That's probably why I have a soft spot for it - if it's proved it's going to throw a lot of spanners in lots of works. :D

B
 

acr0b3rts

acr0b3rts
I'm not a physicist but never liked the dark matter theory. All our calculations show that there must be twice as much matter in the Universe, but we don't see that mass. Well then it must be invisible! Voila! Dark Matter!
 

Dinosawer

Dinosawer
Iskariot said:
Yeah I know, It seems to have escaped me for thirty years.
Imagine my surprise.
Click to expand...

I only heard about it last year in Astronomy class at the university, so it's not that odd. Not really the stuff people talk about on parties (except for me, which probably is why I never get invited to parties) ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom