James Webb Space Telescope finds evidence for alternate theory of gravity

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

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?

MOND has nothing to say about the curvature of spacetime, since MOND is Newtonian (MOdified Newtonian Dynamics). It goes back to "F=ma and gravity is a force" and modifies the rules so that gravity grows weaker faster at a certain scale.

The fact that MOND fits a lot of the data troubled cosmologists, because they know that a General Relativistic theory is needed to explain pretty much the rest of gravity.

TeVeS is an extension to General Relativity that reduces to MOND in the non-relativistic limit. For comparison, General Relativity reduces to Newtonian gravity in the non-relativistic limit. The non-relativistic limit is when speeds and spacetime curvature are small.

How does MOND deal with the effects of time dilation and length contraction? Do we have to go back to Newton's time where there's a universal time?