'Unbelievable': Astronomer Claims 'Direct Evidence' of Gravity Breaking Down
www.vice.com
“I was feeling like I was dreaming. It seemed so unreal. This is because my results did not match any previous results," said astronomer Kyu-Hyun Chae.

What’s that saying again? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence? I don’t think we’re quite there yet, but for all of you MOdified Newtonian Dynamics fans (and Dark Matter haters) out there here’s a bit of good news.

  • Donjuanme@lemmy.world
    18·
    1 year ago

    Don’t need to hate dark matter to appreciate both theories have their positives and their hold ups. There’s forces at work that we don’t understand, one camp poses we can add an unknown mass to make things work, the other poses we can add an unknown modifier to a force to make things work. Neither theory works perfectly, neither theory has (of yet) an identifiable mechanism. I don’t know how this is a divisive issue, there’s legit scientific practices happening from both camps.

    I subscribe to Sabine Hossenfelder’s take on things, “the distinction between dark matter and modified gravity is a false dichotomy, the answer isn’t either/or, it’s both, it’s just a matter of how do we combine them” 2 years ago in this video. https://youtu.be/4_qJptwikRc

    • will_a113@lemmy.mlOP
      2·
      1 year ago

      I just watched that video somewhat recently and couldn’t understand that quote. There are a number of MOND models that literally don’t involve dark matter at all – no new particles added, no unexplained masses needed. So in that case, wouldn’t “how we combine them” just be “set dark matter to 0 and use this different set of equations to solve for gravity in certain circumstances”?

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        3·
        1 year ago

        The MOND models are less accurate than cold dark mater models. As long as MOND fails to explain current phenomina, cold dark matter wins. Period.

        I am a fan of the idea that the standard model is incomplete/wrong, but you cannot in good conscience accept a model that fits the data worse all because the current best model has problems.

        A proper answer explains why the current model works but is inaccurate. MOND models straight up disagree.

  • nbafantest@lemmy.world
    12·
    1 year ago

    A scientist has observed a “gravitational anomaly” in certain star systems

    Seems like the opening to a Star Trek episode

    • cmbabul@lemmy.world
      43·
      1 year ago

      A warp drive is one of the few innovations that might save humanity from our current peril, here’s hoping

      • Einar@lemm.ee
        3·
        1 year ago

        If humanity has proven anything it’s that technology tends to make things worse.

      • LanternEverywhere@kbin.social
        2·
        1 year ago

        Huh, why do you think that? Why would faster than light speed technology have a different impact on society than our current space technologies? (Assuming we don’t encounter aliens)

        • cmbabul@lemmy.world
          12·
          1 year ago

          I mean we’d all still be fucked but a generation ship could give hope to the survival of the species as a whole

          • LanternEverywhere@kbin.social
            4·
            1 year ago

            We haven’t even gotten people to Mars and it would “only” be a couple of year trip with current technology. I can’t imagine society making a generational trip happen any time soon. Sorry for being a Debbie downer.

            • cmbabul@lemmy.world
              1·
              1 year ago

              I mean society as a while sure won’t, but desperate times and all that, unlikely for sure but it’s a glimmer