High School What is the reasoning behind MOND's modification of gravity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PhDnotForMe
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    mond
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND), a theory proposing that gravity behaves differently at large distances, specifically suggesting a proportionality of 1/r instead of the traditional 1/r². Participants debate the validity of MOND, with some asserting it lacks a deeper theoretical foundation and is merely a model to fit observational data. Key points include the assertion that MOND modifies Newton's Laws to introduce a minimum acceleration, a₀, and that changing only the distance dependence of gravitational force is insufficient to achieve MOND-like behavior.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Newtonian gravity and its mathematical formulation
  • Familiarity with the concept of dark matter in astrophysics
  • Knowledge of gravitational acceleration and its dependence on distance
  • Basic comprehension of theoretical physics and alternative gravity theories
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the mathematical derivation of MOND and its implications on galaxy rotation curves
  • Explore the differences between MOND and dark matter theories in astrophysics
  • Study the weak acceleration limit of gravity and its relevance to MOND
  • Investigate other alternative theories of gravity beyond MOND
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, astrophysicists, and students of theoretical physics interested in alternative gravity theories and the dynamics of galaxies.

PhDnotForMe
Messages
56
Reaction score
3
I've been reading a lot about MOND, an alternate theory attempting to explain the rotation of galaxies without using dark matter. It claims that at large distances gravity is proportional to 1/r rather than 1/r^2. In the published article, there are countless experiments done providing evidence that the idea holds possible. However, I can't seem to find any reasoning behind why gravity may behave this way. Is there any?
 
Space news on Phys.org
No. MOND is just that - modifying the equation to fit the rotation curve. It's a toy model, with no deeper reasoning attached.
 
  • Like
Likes PhDnotForMe
PhDnotForMe said:
It claims that at large distances gravity is proportional to 1/r rather than 1/r^2.

It most certainly does not.
 
PhDnotForMe said:
According to the links above, it does.

Untrue. You are misrepresenting what they are saying, and that's not a very nice thing to do. The first link does not say it, and the second discusses a gravitational law of that form to say it's not MOND.
 
With these assumptions, the weak acceleration limit of gravity is:
a = sqrt(GMa_0)/r
with dependence 1/r on distance r from the body of mass M generating the field.

To me that is pretty explicitly saying a ~ 1/r at large distances, so if it's wrong it's not just him...
 
You need to read the entire derivation paragraph. MOND changes Newton's Laws so that there is a minimum acceleration, a0. It has been known for a long time (some of which is referenced in the 2nd paper) that you can't make this work by changing only the distance dependence of the gravitational force. The closest you can come to that statement is that in a single system, if I have two points at r1 and r2, the difference between the accelerations at those points is proportional to (1/r1 - 1/r2). But even that is misleading - if you want MONDy behavior, you have to change the acceleration, not the distance dependence.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 72 ·
3
Replies
72
Views
10K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K