4 ms·
They are advocating MOND by omission. If you say dark matter isn't there you now need a theory that can explain all the observations that do support dark matter
by eloff 4y ago
They are advocating MOND by omission. If you say dark matter isn't there you now need a theory that can explain all the observations that do support dark matter. MOND seems to be the only semi reasonable alternative.
- StanislavPetrov 4y agoIt's perfectly reasonable to say, "your theory is full of holes and isn't based on anything objective that can be measured or proved" without coming up with an alternative theory. You can (and should in my opinion) point out things that are baseless conjecture whether or not you have a better idea. "I don't know" is something a lot of us would be better off saying more often.
- eloff 4y agoI agree, it's fine to point out holes in a theory without an alternative explanation. However, it does still leave the problem of how else do you explain all the dark matter observations. So one must be careful not to give to much weight to those kinds of criticisms, as finding one hole in something that explains ten observations doesn't give much confidence in saying the whole theory is wrong (just an example.) Dark matter still seems a much better explanation than MOND to date, even if I personally feel it looks like a hack.