←back to thread

355 points jchanimal | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.207s | source
Show context
samsartor ◴[] No.42158987[source]
My hangup with MOND is still general relativity. We know for a fact that gravity is _not_ Newtonian, that the inverse square law does not hold. Any model of gravity based on an inverse law is simply wrong.

Another comment linked to https://tritonstation.com/new-blog-page/, which is an excellent read. It makes the case that GR has never been tested at low accelerations, that is might be wrong. But we know for a fact MOND is wrong at high accelerations. Unless your theory can cover both, I don't see how it can be pitched as an improvement to GR.

Edit: this sounds a bit hostile. to be clear, I think modified gravity is absolutely worth researching. but it isn't a silver bullet

replies(7): >>42159034 #>>42159161 #>>42159582 #>>42159774 #>>42160543 #>>42160861 #>>42165272 #
twothreeone ◴[] No.42160861[source]
GR says spacetime is curved by mass, right. So what's the basis for explaining the curvature of space (which can be measured, e.g., LIGO) in MOND?
replies(3): >>42162034 #>>42162873 #>>42164360 #
1. naasking ◴[] No.42164360[source]
MOND is an effective theory, it only describes observations and doesn't put forward any explanation of what's really going on.