MOND : Help with fitting procedure!

  1. I am looking for pedagogical guides to fitting rotation curves with MOdified Newtonian Gravity. I want to study how to fit the luminosity data as well as the kinematic data. I have studied some published papers on MOND fits(Sanders, Mcgaugh, blok etc). But, they are not sufficiently elaborate. Can somebody provide any links, resources that i might find useful? Thank you!
     
  2. jcsd
  3. MOND isn't particularly supported here, simply due to our focus on main stay cosmology. In accordance to [itex]\Lambda[/itex]CDM. You could try www.arxiv.com. I haven't looked at MOND in several years now. Not saying we only discuss LCDM, loop quantum cosmology is another popular model discussed often. MOND simply isn't too popular in forum discussions. The relativistic version of MOND theory (TeVeS), also isn't particulalry discussed. For that matter I can't recall the last discussion on (TeVeS).
     
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2014
  4. But, that's the scenario everywhere! that's why i've been unable to find any pedagogical material on MOND fits to rotation curves. I've surveyed the papers at arxiv.com, but they are too terse to understand sufficiently. :(
     
  5. the only pedagogical material I usually see on it is usually comparisons between the two. Don't know what to tell you. The only help I can offer is to browse through the supportive references of the various MOND articles. MOND simply isn't in standard textbooks. So information on it is very limited. Its far easier to find materials to LQC and LCDM than MOND TeVeS etc.

    here is one pedagogical view between the two, you might find supportive references from it. That's all I can recommend. MOND simply isn't popular and is falling out of favor, it was easier to find papers on it 5 to 10 years ago than it is now. Though I don't believe TeVeS ever gained much popularity. Its on the order of say Poplowskii's spin and torsion model, where he tried to do away with dark energy lol. I don't even think he's working on that model anymore

    http://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.0623v2.pdf

    I'll dig through my archives, I might still have one or two articles tucked away somewhere, it will take some time though I have over 100 gigs of PDF files
     
    1 person likes this.
  6. 1 person likes this.
  7. key note here, you cannot understand MOND unless you also understand the metrics used in
    standard Cosmology. MOND, isn't its own set of metrics, it uses differential geometry, SR and GR just as the FRW and Einstein field equations do. It simply modifies them where needed. That's probably why you find MOND articles terse and have difficulty understanding them.

    put another way you need to first understand LCDM, and all that goes with it
     
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2014
    1 person likes this.
  8. Thanks for all the help! Much appreciated! :)
     
  9. Chronos

    Chronos 10,053
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    MOND is an effective theory - meaning it fits observational evidence to a limited extent. It has no substantive underlying theoretical support.
     
  10. That I agree with, I always found it amusing though that some MOND metrics uses Dipolar dark matter. see the first article
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share a link to this question via email, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

0
Draft saved Draft deleted
Similar discussions for: MOND : Help with fitting procedure!
Loading...