Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
I Am Wrong Again, Or Am I

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Richard Ruquist on July 23, 2002 18:04:33 UTC

It's not dark matter. It is MOND.

But anyway this demonstraes my contention that my life is ruled by coincidence because just after posting the dark matter answer and getting off the computer this morning, I sat down to read the new Scientific American.

The cover of SCIAM proposes an atternative theory to explain the effects of dark matter without having to have dark matter.

Well, I did not say that correctly. The alternative is a modification of newton's law F=ma to include a term that makes F proportional to a squared when a is smaller than a naught (a sub 0). A0 is about one angstrom per sec per sec.

The new theory predicts the effects formerly ascribed to dark matter even better than the dark matter theories do.

What really struck me though is that the theory predicts that f~a^^2 for objects that are within the gravitational field of our s0lar system but far beyond Pluto's orbit, beyond 10,000 earth-sun radii. So it seems that MOND (MOdified Newton Dynamics) can explain spacecraft slowdown at these distances. The a^^2 effect is the same as having extra mass in the solar system that is not explained.

I recommend reading SCIAM. It is not on-line, so you will have to come up with 5 bucks or visit you local library.

Fortunately for my first post on this subject, the MOND theory has already been shown to be a subset of dark matter theory in a paper (1) reviewed in the same SCIAM issue.
(1) How Cold Dark Matter Explains Milgram's Law, Kaplinghat and Turner, Astrophysics Journal,569,pg.L19,April,2002

So the bottomline appears to be that MOND is a curve fit to the gravitational effects of dark matter. Thank god- heaven is preserved in physics.

Thanks again,

Richard

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins