←back to thread

James Webb Space Telescope finds evidence for alternate theory of gravity

(thedebrief.org)
355 points jchanimal | 1 comments | 16 Nov 24 18:33 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
verzali ◴[16 Nov 24 22:38 UTC] No.42160021[source]▶
Why why why do people share articles with sensational headlines like this? Its no wonder science journalism gets a bad rap. This kind of thing really undermines all the people who are actually trying to communicate science properly.
replies(2): >>42160293 #>>42164479 #
muglug ◴[16 Nov 24 23:04 UTC] No.42160293[source]▶
Without this article and HN discussion I’d never have known about MOND, which is (at the very least) a fun theory.
replies(3): >>42160797 #>>42161160 #>>42162764 #
prof-dr-ir ◴[17 Nov 24 01:21 UTC] No.42161160[source]▶
The trouble is that MOND is just not worth your time. In fact, I would even object to calling it a 'theory' in the first place.

MOND is just some wild idea, but a little thought should convince every physicist of its uselessness. It has major issues both in explaining experimental data and in its theoretical consistency. It justifiably receives next to no attention from the vast majority of (astro)physicists.

In popular science the idea however does not seem to want to die, perhaps because it is so easily explained to a layperson. Of course this is a little frustrating for the community, but perhaps we should look at the upsides: more attention for science is probably a good thing, and explaining to people why MOND is so useless provides a good opportunity to discuss some proper physics.

replies(4): >>42162904 #>>42162949 #>>42163227 #>>42164368 #
ogogmad ◴[17 Nov 24 08:51 UTC] No.42162904{3}[source]▶
This is a weirdly arrogant comment given both TFA and the fact that professional physicists have worked on MOND and disagree with everything you've said.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n33aurhg788

Is this typical behaviour for physicsts? Extremely strong opinions expressed in an abrasive way, out of proportion to the available evidence?

replies(2): >>42163504 #>>42164412 #
1. anon291 ◴[17 Nov 24 14:40 UTC] No.42164412{4}[source]▶
In general, scientists (and academics more generally) suffer from some of the most dogmatic thinking on the planet. It's no surprise that many of them find themselves in institutions that were once known for their theology departments.