MOND and expansion of universe

In summary: In other words, if MOND is correct, then external pressure is needed to create the accelerated expansion we observe.In summary, Modified Newtonian Dynamics suggests that the gravitational force acting on a particle of mass m, on the surface of a sphere of radius 10^26 metres, and with a mass of 10^52 kg is greater than the Newtonian expectation and is given by G x10^52 m / (10^26) ^ 2. The acceleration is given by G x10^52 / (10^26) ^ 2 = 10^-11 m/s^2.
  • #1
kurious
641
0
The gravitational force acting on a particle of mass m, on the
surface of a sphere of radius 10^26 metres and with a mass of 10^52
kg is given by
G x10^52 m / (10^26) ^ 2

The acceleration is given by G x10^52 / (10^26) ^ 2 = 10^ - 11 m/ s^2

This is the magnitude of accleration at which modified Newtonian dynamics
becomes a mathematically accurate description of the velocities of stars in spiral galaxies.MOND describes a gravitational force that is stronger than
the usual Newtonian expectation.As the universe expands beyond 10^26 metres,
if MOND is valid as a force law,then we should expect the acceleration of the expansion of the universe at distances greater than 10^26 metres,to be slower than expected.Does anyone agree with this?
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
Please clarify what this MOND is.
 
  • #3
The decceleration due to gravity at 10^26 metres is about 10^-11 m/s^2
using the Newtonian calculation.
This is of a similar order of magnitude to the acceleration
of supernovae due to dark energy at this distance (10^-10 m/s^2).
It is as though gravity has changed signs.This may be a trivial point or it may not.What if the gravitational force carrier comes in particles with two spin states (associated with mass and not charge),one spin positive and the other, of the same magnitude, but negative sign,which exist in a field (could be gravity's own field if force carriers self-interact like gluons), and the high energy spin state is becoming the low energy state, and the low energy state is causing gravitational repulsion (and will cause more repulsion as time goes on and more low energy states form).In a galaxy such as ours, anomlously high star velocities could then be caused by there being fewer low energy repulsive states than expected, and with all the
radiation that a galaxy contains, most low energy spin states could be promoted to high energy states by the radiation.
 
  • #4
ArmoSkater87 said:
Please clarify what this MOND is.
The numerology version.
 
  • #5
Modified Newtonian dynamics.
Basically the Newtonian law F =ma can be modified to give a stronger gravitational
force so that anomalously high orbiting velocities of stars in galaxies can be explained.
The velocities should get smaller with increasing distance from the galactic centre
but they don't - they stay constant.
 
  • #6
What if the source of this high perimeter orbiting velocity is due to external pressure, rather than internal attraction?
We accept that space is expanding, but if the universe is stable, then the only option for the resulting pressure would be to affect existing structures.
 

Related to MOND and expansion of universe

What is MOND and how does it relate to the expansion of the universe?

MOND (Modified Newtonian Dynamics) is a theory that proposes a modification to Newton's laws of gravity to explain the observed discrepancies between the predicted and observed velocities of stars and galaxies in the universe. It suggests that the acceleration of gravity is not constant at very low accelerations, which can explain the observed flat rotation curves of galaxies without the need for dark matter. However, MOND does not directly address the expansion of the universe, which is better explained by the theory of general relativity.

How does MOND affect our understanding of dark matter?

MOND is often proposed as an alternative to the existence of dark matter, suggesting that the observed discrepancies in the velocities of stars and galaxies can be explained by modified laws of gravity rather than the presence of invisible matter. However, MOND has not been able to fully explain all observed phenomena, and the majority of scientists still consider dark matter to be a more compelling explanation for the observed effects.

What evidence supports the expansion of the universe?

The expansion of the universe is supported by multiple lines of evidence, including the redshift of light from distant galaxies, the cosmic microwave background radiation, and the observed distribution of galaxies and clusters in the universe. These observations are consistent with the prediction of general relativity, which describes the expansion of space itself and the increasing distance between galaxies over time.

Can MOND and the expansion of the universe coexist?

While MOND and the expansion of the universe are both attempts to explain observed phenomena in the universe, they are not mutually exclusive. MOND may provide a modified understanding of gravity at small scales, while the expansion of the universe is still best explained by the theory of general relativity. However, MOND has not been able to fully explain all observed phenomena, and the majority of scientists still consider dark matter and general relativity to be the most compelling explanations for the expansion of the universe.

What are the current challenges for MOND and the expansion of the universe?

One of the biggest challenges for MOND is its inability to fully explain all observed phenomena, such as the observed structure of the cosmic microwave background radiation. Additionally, MOND currently lacks a theoretical framework that can explain its observed effects. As for the expansion of the universe, scientists are still trying to understand the nature of dark matter and dark energy, which are believed to make up the majority of the universe's mass and energy, respectively. Further research and observations are needed to fully understand these concepts and their impact on the expansion of the universe.

Similar threads

Replies
19
Views
738
  • Cosmology
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
902
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Cosmology
Replies
24
Views
1K
Replies
26
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Back
Top