Prediction of McGaugh verified?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Structure seeker
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Prediction
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the verification of predictions made by Professor McGaugh regarding Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND). Participants highlight that the MOND-based prediction was originally proposed by other researchers prior to McGaugh's blog post, emphasizing the oversight in the Science Daily report that fails to credit these earlier contributions. This lack of acknowledgment raises concerns about the integrity of scientific reporting and the importance of recognizing foundational work in the field.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND)
  • Familiarity with scientific reporting standards
  • Knowledge of astrophysical predictions and their implications
  • Awareness of the contributions of various researchers in astrophysics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the foundational theories behind Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND)
  • Explore the contributions of earlier researchers in astrophysics related to MOND
  • Investigate the impact of scientific reporting on public perception of research
  • Learn about the methodologies used in astrophysical predictions and their validation
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, astrophysicists, science communicators, and anyone interested in the nuances of scientific reporting and the validation of theoretical predictions in astrophysics.

Physics news on Phys.org
As Prof McGaugh detailed, that MOND-based prediction was made by others many years earlier than his blogpost. It's sad (even perhaps disgraceful) that the Science Daily report neglects to even mention that.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Structure seeker

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
15K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K