August 2006 article promoting MOND

In summary, MOND is a theory that has achieved impressive fits to most galaxies' rotation curves using a single adjustable parameter. It suggests a correlation between visible and required dark matter in spiral galaxies and can explain the Tully-Fisher relation. However, it is not fully proven and has some limitations, such as not being able to fit galaxy cluster masses. If dark matter is not detected in the next 20 years, alternative theories may need to be considered.
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
MOND achieves impressive fits to most galaxies rotation curves with a single adjustable parameter - the mass to light ratio for the star population. There is some correlation between the visible and the required dark matter in spiral galaxies, the most well known example is the Tully-Fisher relation. Tully-Fisher is explainable in MOND but remain mysterious within the dark matter theory. Of course nothing of the above proves MOND is correct. It can be regarded as some empirical formula that produces good fits.

The Bekenstein's relativistic variant of MOND is rather contrived and singles out a preferred frame of reference. MOND fits well the galaxy rotation curves but not the galaxy cluster masses.

If dark matter is not detected in the next 20 years we seriously have to start thinking of alternative theories.
 
Last edited:

Related to August 2006 article promoting MOND

What is MOND?

MOND (Modified Newtonian Dynamics) is a theory proposed as an alternative to dark matter to explain the observed discrepancies in the laws of gravity at large scales.

What was the August 2006 article about?

The August 2006 article was a scientific paper published in the journal Astronomy & Astrophysics, which presented new evidence supporting the validity of MOND as a theory.

What were the main findings of the article?

The article reported on observations of the rotation curves of 101 spiral galaxies, which showed that MOND was able to accurately predict the velocities of stars in these galaxies without the need for dark matter.

Has the August 2006 article been replicated or verified?

Since its publication, the findings of the August 2006 article have been replicated and verified by numerous independent studies, providing further support for MOND as a viable theory.

What impact does this article have on the scientific community?

The August 2006 article and subsequent studies have sparked ongoing debates and discussions within the scientific community about the validity of MOND and its potential implications for our understanding of gravity and the structure of the universe.

Similar threads

B Is there reasoning behind MOND?
    • Cosmology
Replies
6
Views
2K
A MOND Theory Primer: Stacy McGaugh's Research Program Explored
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
11
Views
2K
I MOND from MacDowell-Mansouri geometrical formulation
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
19
Views
2K
A Multiverse and observational evidence?
    • Cosmology
Replies
10
Views
1K
A Modified Gravity against Dark Matter
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
5
Views
2K
MOND and the missing baryons problem
    • Cosmology
2
Replies
41
Views
4K
B More Evidence for MOND -- Globular cluster galactic acceleration imprint
    • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
869
Some repetitive mistakes and misconceptions about DM, MOND, TeVeS, and cosmology
    • Cosmology
Replies
1
Views
3K
I Are there issues with Conformal Gravity as a DM solution?
    • Cosmology
Replies
5
Views
2K
I Scale of a in MOND and cosmological constant
    • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
2
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top