Discovered a way to make MOND fully relativistic

In summary: Bekestein is also a long time colleague of Milgrom who invented MOND. The are both Israeli scientists.The main motivation for the relativistic version is to show that it is possible to craft a theory that is both MOND and relativistic and "well behaved". Several other papers by anti-mond astronomer's had suggested "no go" theorems that claimed that it couldn't be done.It's certainly interesting, but as Bekenstein himself says "But some problems, such as the failure to achieve a perfect Newtonian limit in the outer solar system exist. There remains a large labor to assess how these may be fixed, and to extract consequences of TeVeS for the study
  • #1
pervect
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Insights Author
10,302
1,472
I ran across this some time ago (probably in this forum, somewhere or other) - but I thought it was quite interesting at the time.

It's one of the very few alternatives to GR that is actually inspired by considerations of actual observation.

Basically, someone feels that they've discovered a way to make MOND fully relativistic.

http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0412652

So I thought I'd toss it out again and see what other people thought.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
pervect said:
I ran across this some time ago (probably in this forum, somewhere or other) - but I thought it was quite interesting at the time.

It's one of the very few alternatives to GR that is actually inspired by considerations of actual observation.

Basically, someone feels that they've discovered a way to make MOND fully relativistic.

http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0412652

So I thought I'd toss it out again and see what other people thought.

I've been a regular on the topic. Just look at posts I've made under the link for my name and a good share of them discuss the topic. This paper was discussed at length, for example, here: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=58130
 
Last edited:
  • #3
pervect said:
I ran across this some time ago (probably in this forum, somewhere or other) - but I thought it was quite interesting at the time.

It's one of the very few alternatives to GR that is actually inspired by considerations of actual observation.

Basically, someone feels that they've discovered a way to make MOND fully relativistic.

http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0412652

So I thought I'd toss it out again and see what other people thought.

The someone is Bekenstein, the guy who brought you "black hole thermodynamics" and a corrected version of this paper just appeared at arXiv.
He makes a very favorable case for mond; but his relativistic version, while perhaps a good first stab, seems too complicated. It would be interesting to hear an anti-mond astronomer's comments.
 
  • #4
Rob Woodside said:
The someone is Bekenstein, the guy who brought you "black hole thermodynamics" and a corrected version of this paper just appeared at arXiv.
He makes a very favorable case for mond; but his relativistic version, while perhaps a good first stab, seems too complicated. It would be interesting to hear an anti-mond astronomer's comments.

Bekestein is also a long time colleague of Milgrom who invented MOND. The are both Israeli scientists.

The main motivation for the relativistic version is to show that it is possible to craft a theory that is both MOND and relativistic and "well behaved". Several other papers by anti-mond astronomer's had suggested "no go" theorems that claimed that it couldn't be done.
 
  • #5
It's certainly interesting, but as Bekenstein himself says "But some problems, such as the failure to achieve a perfect Newtonian limit in the outer solar system exist. There remains a large labor to assess how these may be fixed, and to extract consequences of TeVeS for the study of cosmological perturbations, gravitational wave astronomy, binary pulsar timing, and post-Newtonian tests regarding preferred frame effects, to name the most obvious.' (love that 'large labor'!)

The good news is that if TeVeS makes specific, concrete lensing or rotation curve predictions which are different for different types of objects (e.g. non-spherical vs spherical; size, mass, or density differences), it may be quite easy to test these using existing, publicly available data.
 

1. What is MOND and why is it important?

MOND stands for Modified Newtonian Dynamics and is a theory proposed to explain the discrepancies between Newton's laws of motion and the observed behavior of galaxies. It is important because it offers an alternative to the theory of dark matter and has implications for our understanding of gravity and the structure of the universe.

2. How does making MOND fully relativistic change our understanding of the universe?

Making MOND fully relativistic means that it can account for the effects of gravity in all regimes, including those where the gravitational field is strong, such as near black holes. This allows for a more complete and accurate understanding of the behavior of galaxies and the large-scale structure of the universe.

3. What led to the discovery of a way to make MOND fully relativistic?

Scientists have been working on developing a fully relativistic version of MOND for many years. The discovery was made through a combination of theoretical work, computer simulations, and observations of the behavior of galaxies.

4. How does this discovery impact our understanding of dark matter?

The development of a fully relativistic MOND has the potential to challenge the current understanding of dark matter. It offers an alternative explanation for the observed behavior of galaxies without the need for dark matter. However, more research is needed to fully understand the implications of this discovery on our understanding of dark matter.

5. What are the potential applications of a fully relativistic MOND?

A fully relativistic MOND has the potential to improve our understanding of gravity and the structure of the universe. It could also have practical applications in fields such as astrophysics and cosmology, as well as potentially leading to new technologies and advancements in our understanding of the fundamental laws of physics.

Similar threads

  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
3
Replies
71
Views
5K
Replies
72
Views
5K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
827
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
2
Replies
37
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
219
Views
13K
Back
Top