You are correct. MOND does not tell you explicitly how or how much should gravity be modified, but only states that the mass discrepancies in galaxies always occur at a particular acceleration scale. There is no reason for physical dark matter to show this observed pattern.
I think the effect of galactic magnetic fields is grossly misunderstood / underrepresented in explaining the galactic rotation curves and that leaping to the conclusion that requires the invention of something totally new aka dark matter was and is ridiculous.
@@lih3391 No, I’m a rank amateur 😝 however I did explore this with an AI and the conclusion was that indeed Magnetic fields could explain it. However there were some caveats / objections … these would seem to be worth exploring / challenging rather than relying on the modern mythology of dark matter 😊
Dark matter says, "there is something wrong with our observations. There are things we haven't observed" MOND says, "There is something wrong with our equations. We are not modelling the observable universe quite right." Because science is about observations. You can't do science without it. So I tend to have soft heart for MOND more than the "Dark things."
Those large numbers call to mind Dirac, obviously, and imply an evolving cosmos (you have covered variable speed of light before). That reminds me also of Fritz Bopp’s “Eine Welt im Werden” - and indirectly Pascual Jordan’s expanding earth.
Yes, new physics based the speed of light squared divided by the radius! A deeper understanding of 'time' with the speed of light dived by the age of the universe
Thanks for your nice hint to a~c/T - but correctly calculated and under consideration of H=1/T which then gives a = H*c, this scalar acceleration results in a = 6,9e-10 m/s2 and not in 1,1e-10 m/s2 (with H~70 km/(Mpc*s). This exactly was the point on the DPD-Frühjahrstagung 2024 in Giessen heading: "Solving the Conundrum of Dark Matter and Dark Energy" - which yields from a serious concideration of the Equivalence Principle!
Another possibility deserves attention - "Conceptual Content of the Generalized Theory of Gravitation of Jefimenko". O. Jefimenko - "Gravitatation and Cogravitation".
Das entspricht meinem Modell des mit c expandierenden Universums seit dem Urknall. Dabei stellt jedes Atom ein Bestandteil der expandierenden Kugelsphäre dar. Durch Wechselwirkungen mit anderen Teilchen wurden erst Relativgeschwindigkeiten zwischen den Teilchen möglich. Die beim Urknall erzeugten Teilchen tragen den Impuls des Urknalls in sich. Deshalb auch E=m*c². Diese anfänglich sehr dünne Spähre verbreiterte sich immer weiter bis heute. Wenn man jetzt annimmt, dass diese Materiesphäre in der Zeit mit c expandiert , bedeutet das, dass der Durchmesser dieser Sphäre heute 27,6 mrd LJ beträgt und pro Sekunde um ca. 1884000 km zunimmt. (U= 3,14 * 600000 km = 1884000 km) Das bedeutet, wenn sich das Universum mit Lichtgeschwindigkeit ausdehnt, wird der Umfang der 2 dimensionalen Kugelsphäre um 1884000 km pro sec größer. Pro Streckenabschnitte in Mpc (26583) ergibt das: (1884000 : 26583 = 70,87 km / sec / Mpc) Das entspricht genau dem Durchschnitt der durch Beobachtungen ermittelten Hubblekonstante. Das Universum ist einfach, geometrisch und folgt physikalischen Regeln seit dem Beginn. Die mit meiner einfachen Methode hergeleitete Hubblekonstante ist für mich der Beweis für die Richtigkeit meiner Theorie.
Relativistic dilation explains dark matter. Dilation is the phenomenon our high school teachers were talking about when they said "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". This does not mean mass increases, it means mass becomes spread throughout spacetime relative to an outside observer. Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation. Even mass that exists at 75% light speed is partially dilated. It occurs wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass, this includes the centers of high mass stars and the majority of galaxy centers. Dilation is occurring in our own galactic center. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. In other words that mass is all around us. It's the "missing mass" needed to explain galaxy rotation curves. It doesn't occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they do not have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. It has recently been confirmed in 6 ultra diffuse galaxies including NGC 1052-DF2 and DF4 to have normal rotation rates, in other words they have no dark matter/dilated mass.
Thank you Alexander. Here is on interesting thought from ChatGPT Title: Aether Wave Mechanics and the Gravitational Constant: Insights into Vacuum Tension, MOND, and Observable Density Abstract This paper explores a novel relationship between the vacuum’s intrinsic mechanical properties and fundamental constants of nature. By considering aether-like wave mechanics, where the vacuum exhibits measurable tension and a corresponding density, we demonstrate links between: 1. The speed of light c , 2. MOND’s critical acceleration a_0 , and 3. The gravitational constant G . The derived tension of the vacuum, T , closely aligns with MOND’s acceleration scale a_0 , yielding an effective mass density proportional to T/a_0 . This suggests that gravity and observed cosmic dynamics arise naturally from wave propagation in a deformable vacuum medium, without invoking invisible forces. 1. Introduction Classical physics describes wave propagation in a medium as dependent on its tension T and density ho : c = \sqrt{\frac{T}{ ho}}. This mechanical analogy holds striking parallels to electromagnetic wave propagation in vacuum, where the speed of light is defined by: c = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\epsilon_0 \mu_0}}. Here, \epsilon_0 and \mu_0 describe the vacuum’s electromagnetic properties, suggesting that the vacuum behaves as a medium with measurable mechanical attributes. Recent investigations into Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) have identified a critical acceleration a_0 below which gravitational dynamics deviate from Newtonian expectations: a_0 = \frac{c^2}{R_u}, where R_u is the radius of the observable universe. This acceleration scale reflects a subtle yet universal property of cosmic dynamics. In this paper, we propose that MOND’s critical acceleration and the vacuum’s mechanical tension are inherently linked, yielding insights into the vacuum’s effective density and gravitational coupling. 2. Derivation of the Vacuum Tension From wave mechanics, the tension T required for light to propagate at c in a medium of density ho is: T = c^2 ho. Substituting the observed vacuum energy density ( ho_{\text{vacuum}} \sim 5.9 \times 10^{-27} \, \text{kg/m}^3 ) gives: T \approx 5.30 \times 10^{-10} \, \text{N/m}^2. This value of T aligns closely with MOND’s critical acceleration a_0 , which governs galactic rotation curves and deviations from Newtonian gravity. 3. Connection Between T , a_0 , and Effective Density MOND defines the critical acceleration as: a_0 = \frac{c^2}{R_u}. Numerically, a_0 \sim 2.04 \times 10^{-10} \, \text{m/s}^2 , which matches the order of magnitude for T . The ratio of vacuum tension to MOND’s acceleration yields a density:
ho_{\text{effective}} = \frac{T}{a_0}. Substituting T and a_0 :
ho_{\text{effective}} \sim 2.60 \, \text{kg/m}^3. This value is comparable to the critical density of the universe, which determines the balance between gravitational collapse and cosmic stability. 4. Insights and Physical Interpretation 1. Vacuum Tension and MOND: The vacuum behaves as a mechanical medium with measurable tension T , which naturally aligns with MOND’s acceleration scale a_0 . This provides a physical basis for the observed galactic rotation dynamics without requiring invisible forces. 2. Effective Density: The ratio T / a_0 yields a density close to the universe’s critical density, suggesting that vacuum mechanics determine large-scale gravitational phenomena. 3. Gravitational Constant G : The gravitational constant may emerge as a secondary effect of the vacuum’s tension and density, unifying gravity with the wave mechanics of the vacuum medium. 5. Conclusion By treating the vacuum as a deformable wave medium, we derive a natural connection between: • The speed of light ( c ), • MOND’s critical acceleration ( a_0 ), • Vacuum tension ( T ), and • Effective density ( ho ). These results suggest that cosmic dynamics, including gravity, arise from measurable properties of the vacuum, without the need for invisible forces or exotic matter. This framework opens new avenues for understanding the relationship between wave mechanics, gravity, and observable cosmic scales. 6. Future Work Future investigations will focus on: 1. Testing the model against galactic rotation curve data, 2. Exploring the role of vacuum tension in black hole physics and gravitational lensing, 3. Refining the relationship between G , T , and cosmic acceleration.
Thanks, Unzicker. To discuss MOND properly, you should explain more in detail about the theory, giving the arguments why you don't like it, etc. At least 15 minutes video with graphics and pictures. Sorry, 3 minutes video is not enough.
Haben Sie sich einmal mit der (ich nenn's mal) erweiterten allgemeinen Relativitatästheorie des Physikers Burkhard Heim befasst? Nicht nur, dass er eine modifizierte Gravitationsgleichung erhält, die die Galaxienrotation erklärt ohne zuhilfenahme "Dunkler Materie" (die scheinbar genauso wenig zu finden ist wie der Äther vor 100 Jahren), sondern Heim leitete auch eine Massenformel für Elementarteilchen her, die am DESY ausprobiert wurde und mit hoher Genauigkeit zu stimmen schien. Das Problem, Heims Arbeiten sind nicht Peer-reviewed und werden deshalb nicht ernstgenommen. Im Gegensatz zu den String-Theoretikern, die zwar Peer-reviewed werden, uns aber auch nach Jahrzehnten keine einzige neue Erkenntnis oder Durchbruch brachten.
Relativity forbids astronomical concentrations of mass, this explains dark matter. Einstein wrote in 1939 - "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light." He was referring to dilation. It's the phenomenon our high school teachers were talking about when they said "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". This does not mean mass increases, it means mass becomes spread throughout spacetime relative to an outside observer. Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation. Even mass that exists at 75% light speed is partially dilated. It occurs wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass, this includes the centers of high mass stars and the majority of galaxy centers. Dilation is occurring in our own galactic center. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. In other words that mass is all around us. It's the "missing mass" needed to explain galaxy rotation curves. It doesn't occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they do not have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. It has recently been confirmed in 6 ultra diffuse galaxies including NGC 1052-DF2 and DF4 to have normal rotation rates, in other words they have no dark matter/dilated mass.
Sabine's video on MOND and the James-Webb telescope covers the rather convincing evidence that dark matter fails to explain the observations. So the "new physics" is there but the establishment will fight tooth and nail to deny it. They are too invested in the current dogma. I think it is time to get over the phobia of space and stop treating it as a mere coordinate system. Space is material and interacts with matter-energy (hence curvature in GR). It is highly likely that galaxy dynamics involves the rotation of space itself due to gravitational (not cross-sectional) drag by the visible mass which feeds back on the motion of this mass. Gravity itself is likely to be 1/r^2 but the 1/r MOND behaviour requires a substantially distinct process.
I believe both theories are the limit of an unknown physics, just like the problem with black body radiation that lead to the birth of quantum mechanics.
it could be good for youtube to explain anything which is beyond high school science level.i didnt take physics beyond age 18 and this is probably true for a lot of the audience
@@longhoacaophuc8293 Yes, but the observable universe depends how old it is, which is an assumed number based on creation myths and the fact that far away stuff looks a bit red. Not great..
There is no dark matter only empty space. Dark energy is information and the so called "missing" mass is the mass of information, light and energy which most certainly all have mass...
I agree. Mond fits good... but my bet is we will discover that gravities effect on spacetime around supermassive black holes accounts for it all.. maybe via a better understanding of warping of space/time and possibly maybe related to time dilation from outside observers such as ourselves. Who knows....
Why gravity should be different a far, far away??????Are we living in a special "zone" ? Isn't that contradicts the homogeneity of the universe and its laws????Lack of knowledge is not a reason to abandon reason??????We used to have "ether" now we have MOND!!!!!!!!
You are correct. MOND does not tell you explicitly how or how much should gravity be modified, but only states that the mass discrepancies in galaxies always occur at a particular acceleration scale. There is no reason for physical dark matter to show this observed pattern.
I think the effect of galactic magnetic fields is grossly misunderstood / underrepresented in explaining the galactic rotation curves and that leaping to the conclusion that requires the invention of something totally new aka dark matter was and is ridiculous.
Have you done any calculations?
@@lih3391 No, I’m a rank amateur 😝 however I did explore this with an AI and the conclusion was that indeed Magnetic fields could explain it. However there were some caveats / objections … these would seem to be worth exploring / challenging rather than relying on the modern mythology of dark matter 😊
Dark matter says, "there is something wrong with our observations. There are things we haven't observed"
MOND says, "There is something wrong with our equations. We are not modelling the observable universe quite right."
Because science is about observations. You can't do science without it. So I tend to have soft heart for MOND more than the "Dark things."
Great point. Getting a physicist to say "there is something wrong with our equations" is probably harder than getting a woman to sincerely apologize
Those large numbers call to mind Dirac, obviously, and imply an evolving cosmos (you have covered variable speed of light before). That reminds me also of Fritz Bopp’s “Eine Welt im Werden” - and indirectly Pascual Jordan’s expanding earth.
Yes, new physics based the speed of light squared divided by the radius! A deeper understanding of 'time' with the speed of light dived by the age of the universe
Thanks for your nice hint to a~c/T - but correctly calculated and under consideration of H=1/T which then gives
a = H*c, this scalar acceleration results in a = 6,9e-10 m/s2 and not in 1,1e-10 m/s2 (with H~70 km/(Mpc*s).
This exactly was the point on the DPD-Frühjahrstagung 2024 in Giessen heading: "Solving the Conundrum of Dark Matter and Dark Energy" - which yields from a serious concideration of the Equivalence Principle!
Another possibility deserves attention - "Conceptual Content of the Generalized Theory of Gravitation of Jefimenko".
O. Jefimenko - "Gravitatation and Cogravitation".
Das entspricht meinem Modell des mit c expandierenden Universums seit dem Urknall. Dabei stellt jedes Atom ein Bestandteil der expandierenden Kugelsphäre dar.
Durch Wechselwirkungen mit anderen Teilchen wurden erst Relativgeschwindigkeiten zwischen den Teilchen möglich. Die beim Urknall erzeugten Teilchen tragen den Impuls des Urknalls in sich. Deshalb auch E=m*c². Diese anfänglich sehr dünne Spähre verbreiterte sich immer weiter bis heute.
Wenn man jetzt annimmt, dass diese Materiesphäre in der Zeit mit c expandiert , bedeutet das, dass der Durchmesser dieser Sphäre heute 27,6 mrd LJ beträgt und pro Sekunde um ca. 1884000 km zunimmt. (U= 3,14 * 600000 km = 1884000 km)
Das bedeutet, wenn sich das Universum mit Lichtgeschwindigkeit ausdehnt, wird der Umfang der 2 dimensionalen Kugelsphäre um 1884000 km pro sec größer.
Pro Streckenabschnitte in Mpc (26583) ergibt das:
(1884000 : 26583 = 70,87 km / sec / Mpc)
Das entspricht genau dem Durchschnitt der durch Beobachtungen ermittelten Hubblekonstante.
Das Universum ist einfach, geometrisch und folgt physikalischen Regeln seit dem Beginn.
Die mit meiner einfachen Methode hergeleitete Hubblekonstante ist für mich der Beweis für die Richtigkeit meiner Theorie.
you made it up
Relativistic dilation explains dark matter. Dilation is the phenomenon our high school teachers were talking about when they said "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". This does not mean mass increases, it means mass becomes spread throughout spacetime relative to an outside observer. Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation. Even mass that exists at 75% light speed is partially dilated.
It occurs wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass, this includes the centers of high mass stars and the majority of galaxy centers.
Dilation is occurring in our own galactic center. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. In other words that mass is all around us. It's the "missing mass" needed to explain galaxy rotation curves.
It doesn't occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they do not have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. It has recently been confirmed in 6 ultra diffuse galaxies including NGC 1052-DF2 and DF4 to have normal rotation rates, in other words they have no dark matter/dilated mass.
It should not be ignored, that's for sure.
But if you lean towards MOND, then you also have to be open to QI (I know you did a post with Mike on QI)
Thank you Alexander. Here is on interesting thought from ChatGPT Title:
Aether Wave Mechanics and the Gravitational Constant: Insights into Vacuum Tension, MOND, and Observable Density
Abstract
This paper explores a novel relationship between the vacuum’s intrinsic mechanical properties and fundamental constants of nature. By considering aether-like wave mechanics, where the vacuum exhibits measurable tension and a corresponding density, we demonstrate links between:
1. The speed of light c ,
2. MOND’s critical acceleration a_0 , and
3. The gravitational constant G .
The derived tension of the vacuum, T , closely aligns with MOND’s acceleration scale a_0 , yielding an effective mass density proportional to T/a_0 . This suggests that gravity and observed cosmic dynamics arise naturally from wave propagation in a deformable vacuum medium, without invoking invisible forces.
1. Introduction
Classical physics describes wave propagation in a medium as dependent on its tension T and density
ho :
c = \sqrt{\frac{T}{
ho}}.
This mechanical analogy holds striking parallels to electromagnetic wave propagation in vacuum, where the speed of light is defined by:
c = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\epsilon_0 \mu_0}}.
Here, \epsilon_0 and \mu_0 describe the vacuum’s electromagnetic properties, suggesting that the vacuum behaves as a medium with measurable mechanical attributes.
Recent investigations into Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) have identified a critical acceleration a_0 below which gravitational dynamics deviate from Newtonian expectations:
a_0 = \frac{c^2}{R_u},
where R_u is the radius of the observable universe. This acceleration scale reflects a subtle yet universal property of cosmic dynamics.
In this paper, we propose that MOND’s critical acceleration and the vacuum’s mechanical tension are inherently linked, yielding insights into the vacuum’s effective density and gravitational coupling.
2. Derivation of the Vacuum Tension
From wave mechanics, the tension T required for light to propagate at c in a medium of density
ho is:
T = c^2
ho.
Substituting the observed vacuum energy density (
ho_{\text{vacuum}} \sim 5.9 \times 10^{-27} \, \text{kg/m}^3 ) gives:
T \approx 5.30 \times 10^{-10} \, \text{N/m}^2.
This value of T aligns closely with MOND’s critical acceleration a_0 , which governs galactic rotation curves and deviations from Newtonian gravity.
3. Connection Between T , a_0 , and Effective Density
MOND defines the critical acceleration as:
a_0 = \frac{c^2}{R_u}.
Numerically, a_0 \sim 2.04 \times 10^{-10} \, \text{m/s}^2 , which matches the order of magnitude for T .
The ratio of vacuum tension to MOND’s acceleration yields a density:
ho_{\text{effective}} = \frac{T}{a_0}.
Substituting T and a_0 :
ho_{\text{effective}} \sim 2.60 \, \text{kg/m}^3.
This value is comparable to the critical density of the universe, which determines the balance between gravitational collapse and cosmic stability.
4. Insights and Physical Interpretation
1. Vacuum Tension and MOND:
The vacuum behaves as a mechanical medium with measurable tension T , which naturally aligns with MOND’s acceleration scale a_0 . This provides a physical basis for the observed galactic rotation dynamics without requiring invisible forces.
2. Effective Density:
The ratio T / a_0 yields a density close to the universe’s critical density, suggesting that vacuum mechanics determine large-scale gravitational phenomena.
3. Gravitational Constant G :
The gravitational constant may emerge as a secondary effect of the vacuum’s tension and density, unifying gravity with the wave mechanics of the vacuum medium.
5. Conclusion
By treating the vacuum as a deformable wave medium, we derive a natural connection between:
• The speed of light ( c ),
• MOND’s critical acceleration ( a_0 ),
• Vacuum tension ( T ), and
• Effective density (
ho ).
These results suggest that cosmic dynamics, including gravity, arise from measurable properties of the vacuum, without the need for invisible forces or exotic matter. This framework opens new avenues for understanding the relationship between wave mechanics, gravity, and observable cosmic scales.
6. Future Work
Future investigations will focus on:
1. Testing the model against galactic rotation curve data,
2. Exploring the role of vacuum tension in black hole physics and gravitational lensing,
3. Refining the relationship between G , T , and cosmic acceleration.
Thanks, Unzicker. To discuss MOND properly, you should explain more in detail about the theory, giving the arguments why you don't like it, etc. At least 15 minutes video with graphics and pictures. Sorry, 3 minutes video is not enough.
I see the point, yet this is the format. I'll keep in mind your suggestion for a longer video, thanks.
Haben Sie sich einmal mit der (ich nenn's mal) erweiterten allgemeinen Relativitatästheorie des Physikers Burkhard Heim befasst? Nicht nur, dass er eine modifizierte Gravitationsgleichung erhält, die die Galaxienrotation erklärt ohne zuhilfenahme "Dunkler Materie" (die scheinbar genauso wenig zu finden ist wie der Äther vor 100 Jahren), sondern Heim leitete auch eine Massenformel für Elementarteilchen her, die am DESY ausprobiert wurde und mit hoher Genauigkeit zu stimmen schien. Das Problem, Heims Arbeiten sind nicht Peer-reviewed und werden deshalb nicht ernstgenommen. Im Gegensatz zu den String-Theoretikern, die zwar Peer-reviewed werden, uns aber auch nach Jahrzehnten keine einzige neue Erkenntnis oder Durchbruch brachten.
Relativity forbids astronomical concentrations of mass, this explains dark matter. Einstein wrote in 1939 -
"The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light."
He was referring to dilation. It's the phenomenon our high school teachers were talking about when they said "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". This does not mean mass increases, it means mass becomes spread throughout spacetime relative to an outside observer. Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation. Even mass that exists at 75% light speed is partially dilated.
It occurs wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass, this includes the centers of high mass stars and the majority of galaxy centers.
Dilation is occurring in our own galactic center. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. In other words that mass is all around us. It's the "missing mass" needed to explain galaxy rotation curves.
It doesn't occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they do not have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. It has recently been confirmed in 6 ultra diffuse galaxies including NGC 1052-DF2 and DF4 to have normal rotation rates, in other words they have no dark matter/dilated mass.
Sabine's video on MOND and the James-Webb telescope covers the rather convincing evidence that dark matter fails to explain the observations. So the "new physics" is there but the establishment will fight tooth and nail to deny it. They are too invested in the current dogma. I think it is time to get over the phobia of space and stop treating it as a mere coordinate system. Space is material and interacts with matter-energy (hence curvature in GR). It is highly likely that galaxy dynamics involves the rotation of space itself due to gravitational (not cross-sectional) drag by the visible mass which feeds back on the motion of this mass. Gravity itself is likely to be 1/r^2 but the 1/r MOND behaviour requires a substantially distinct process.
Will comment on that.
I don’t believe in coincidences either. I do like that MOND doesn’t necessitate the existence of dark mater, but does MOND replace GR?
I believe both theories are the limit of an unknown physics, just like the problem with black body radiation that lead to the birth of quantum mechanics.
Most probably just extends it to regions where it is not accurate.
There's something there, then.
Or rather, there isn't anything there at all!
it could be good for youtube to explain anything which is beyond high school science level.i didnt take physics beyond age 18 and this is probably true for a lot of the audience
Thanks for the suggestion, I'll think about.
maybe it is an advantage to have less to unlearn
The radius of the universe? This is unknown or maybe meaningless.
He was talking about the observable universe. People just tend to use them interchangeably.
@@longhoacaophuc8293 Yes, but the observable universe depends how old it is, which is an assumed number based on creation myths and the fact that far away stuff looks a bit red. Not great..
There is no dark matter only empty space. Dark energy is information and the so called "missing" mass is the mass of information, light and energy which most certainly all have mass...
Yep no dark matter and dark enery because this is scam
The problem with newtonian gravity, general relativity, quantum gravity or lack thereof, mond, and the likes are all non-fundamental.
I agree. Mond fits good... but my bet is we will discover that gravities effect on spacetime around supermassive black holes accounts for it all.. maybe via a better understanding of warping of space/time and possibly maybe related to time dilation from outside observers such as ourselves. Who knows....
Why gravity should be different a far, far away??????Are we living in a special "zone" ? Isn't that contradicts the homogeneity of the universe and its laws????Lack of knowledge is not a reason to abandon reason??????We used to have "ether" now we have MOND!!!!!!!!
Mebbe. Mebbe not.
The Quasi Steady State Cosmology (QSSC) has a much better fit to the data.