Hacker News Reader

Comment by i_no_can_eat | Hacker News Reader

I never mentioned dark matter. My only point is that any modern gravitational theory needs to do at least as well as general relativity. That means (among others): explaining the precession or Mercury; describe black holes; predict gravitational waves. So if MOND is to be taken seriously, it needs to do all of that. That's all, really.

View on HN

That's a really bad bar, beacuse it creates a bootstrapping problem: There's a lot of very difficult math that you have to do to get to that point.

And if you say "don't take it seriously until it explains all those things" then why should anyone bother to do the heavy lifting for all that math?

Let me make a different suggestion: As soon as you have one or two very interesting observations that modern GR can't explain that are apparently gravitational, then you should start encouraging people to take it seriously and start working on the hard math.

> I never mentioned dark matter. My only point is that any modern gravitational theory needs to do at least as well as general relativity.

It's a misconception that MOND involves abandoning GR:

https://tritonstation.com/2023/02/27/take-it-where/

There is no misconception. The only class of theories that I'm aware of that have MOND as their non-relativistic limit are TeVeS, and these have been ruled out by experiments. If you have something else in mind, please provide a paper reference.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com