2
$\begingroup$

MOND, based on a modifications of Newton's law for small accelerations, describes the rotation curves of stars in most galaxies, especially the outer stars.

Has MOND been tested for the stars in our own galaxy, the Milky Way? Is there any publication on this topic?

It appears that Does MOND make good predictions? does not answer this question, because it is about other galaxies; it does not discuss the Milky Way at all. This question is about rotation curves of the stars in the Milky Way only - not about other stars.

The challenge is different, because one has to measure many different stars at many different positions in the sky, and then deduce the rotation curve.

$\endgroup$
11
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ MOND hasn’t been “confirmed” and relatively few physicists accept it (compared with dark matter). See Wikipedia for its problems. $\endgroup$
    – Ghoster
    Commented Nov 12, 2022 at 7:56
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Possible duplicates: physics.stackexchange.com/q/5762/2451 and links therein. $\endgroup$
    – Qmechanic
    Commented Nov 12, 2022 at 8:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Qmechanic: no, it is not a duplicate - I edited the question and the text to make this clear. $\endgroup$
    – KlausK
    Commented Nov 12, 2022 at 11:48
  • $\begingroup$ @Ghoster MOND has its problems, especially around the issue of cosmological dark matter. Given that not even dark matter has been detected, MOND is a hypothesis among several, none of which has been definitely confirmed. $\endgroup$
    – KlausK
    Commented Nov 12, 2022 at 11:50
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Googling "milky way" mond turns up a few papers. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 12, 2022 at 20:40

2 Answers 2

2
$\begingroup$

MOND has many successes on the galactic scale (see Mcgaugh 2012 for a review) , but still falls short of explaining the observed mass density of the Bullet Cluster (see this for a review). Since MOND is not a relativistic theory, it cannot be the full story. Once you try to develop a relativistic theory that gives you MOND predictions at the appropriate limits, it falls short of explaining many phenomena we see on cosmological scales such as the CMB anisotropies and the Baryonic Acoustic Oscillations. Thus, one finds relativistic MONDian theories invoking the notion of "dark fields" and "dark matter" and so we are back to square 1.

$\endgroup$
-1
$\begingroup$

This paper by McGaugh was pointed out to me:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.11158

In summary, MOND is better for the Milky Way than LambdaCDM.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ ...by some definition of "better" $\endgroup$
    – rfl
    Commented Nov 15, 2022 at 5:52
  • $\begingroup$ Yes: fewer fitting parameters. $\endgroup$
    – KlausK
    Commented Nov 15, 2022 at 8:25

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.