Is MOND Valid in Describing Universal Expansion Beyond 10^26 Metres?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the validity of Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) in explaining universal expansion beyond 10^26 meters. It highlights that at this distance, the gravitational acceleration calculated using Newtonian physics is approximately 10^-11 m/s^2, which is similar to the acceleration attributed to dark energy. MOND proposes a stronger gravitational force that could lead to slower-than-expected expansion rates at these distances. The conversation also explores the idea that gravitational forces may behave differently due to potential interactions of force carrier particles, suggesting a shift from attraction to repulsion over time. Overall, the implications of MOND challenge traditional views of gravity and cosmic expansion.
kurious
Messages
633
Reaction score
0
The gravitational force acting on a particle of mass m, on the
surface of a sphere of radius 10^26 metres and with a mass of 10^52
kg is given by
G x10^52 m / (10^26) ^ 2

The acceleration is given by G x10^52 / (10^26) ^ 2 = 10^ - 11 m/ s^2

This is the magnitude of accleration at which modified Newtonian dynamics
becomes a mathematically accurate description of the velocities of stars in spiral galaxies.MOND describes a gravitational force that is stronger than
the usual Newtonian expectation.As the universe expands beyond 10^26 metres,
if MOND is valid as a force law,then we should expect the acceleration of the expansion of the universe at distances greater than 10^26 metres,to be slower than expected.Does anyone agree with this?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Please clarify what this MOND is.
 
The decceleration due to gravity at 10^26 metres is about 10^-11 m/s^2
using the Newtonian calculation.
This is of a similar order of magnitude to the acceleration
of supernovae due to dark energy at this distance (10^-10 m/s^2).
It is as though gravity has changed signs.This may be a trivial point or it may not.What if the gravitational force carrier comes in particles with two spin states (associated with mass and not charge),one spin positive and the other, of the same magnitude, but negative sign,which exist in a field (could be gravity's own field if force carriers self-interact like gluons), and the high energy spin state is becoming the low energy state, and the low energy state is causing gravitational repulsion (and will cause more repulsion as time goes on and more low energy states form).In a galaxy such as ours, anomlously high star velocities could then be caused by there being fewer low energy repulsive states than expected, and with all the
radiation that a galaxy contains, most low energy spin states could be promoted to high energy states by the radiation.
 
ArmoSkater87 said:
Please clarify what this MOND is.
The numerology version.
 
Modified Newtonian dynamics.
Basically the Newtonian law F =ma can be modified to give a stronger gravitational
force so that anomalously high orbiting velocities of stars in galaxies can be explained.
The velocities should get smaller with increasing distance from the galactic centre
but they don't - they stay constant.
 
What if the source of this high perimeter orbiting velocity is due to external pressure, rather than internal attraction?
We accept that space is expanding, but if the universe is stable, then the only option for the resulting pressure would be to affect existing structures.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...
Back
Top