Making MOND fully relativistic

[pervect]

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.

 

[ohwilleke]

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

 

[Rob Woodside]

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.

 

[ohwilleke]

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.

 

[Nereid]

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.[/color]' (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.