MOND vs Dark Matter

[alan1000]

For those of us who are not scientists by training, indeed have no scientific aptitude whatsoever, but who have a passionate interest in scientific questions, I'd like to post this question.

Some proponents of MOND theory have claimed that it can explain the present state of the universe, and form a basis for prediction, without the need to posit the existence of "Dark Matter". There is an obvious parallel here with the "Aether" debate of more than a century ago.

My questions is this. Can anybody suggest an experimental method, analogous to the Michelson-Morley experiment, which might help to decide the MOND/Dark Matter debate?

[Atla]

For those of us who are not scientists by training, indeed have no scientific aptitude whatsoever, but who have a passionate interest in scientific questions, I'd like to post this question.

Some proponents of MOND theory have claimed that it can explain the present state of the universe, and form a basis for prediction, without the need to posit the existence of "Dark Matter". There is an obvious parallel here with the "Aether" debate of more than a century ago.

My questions is this. Can anybody suggest an experimental method, analogous to the Michelson-Morley experiment, which might help to decide the MOND/Dark Matter debate?

Dunno about analogous, but now the wide binary test (binary stars orbiting each other from a big distance) seems to go against MOND

[Age]

For those of us who are not scientists by training, indeed have no scientific aptitude whatsoever, but who have a passionate interest in scientific questions, I'd like to post this question.

Some proponents of MOND theory have claimed that it can explain the present state of the universe, and form a basis for prediction, without the need to posit the existence of "Dark Matter". There is an obvious parallel here with the "Aether" debate of more than a century ago.

My questions is this. Can anybody suggest an experimental method, analogous to the Michelson-Morley experiment, which might help to decide the MOND/Dark Matter debate?

But why even make up theories, hypotheses, models, or anything else to then just decide what 'might be' true and right?

Why not just look at what actually is, without any pre-existing beliefs nor presumptions?

When done so properly and Correctly, then what the so-called 'present state of the Universe' is, exactly, is seen, understood, and known.

[Cerveny]

See pls relevant viewtopic.php?p=626732#p626732

[Flannel Jesus]

But why even make up theories, hypotheses, models, or anything else to then just decide what 'might be' true and right?

Why not just look at what actually is, without any pre-existing beliefs nor presumptions?

When done so properly and Correctly, then what the so-called 'present state of the Universe' is, exactly, is seen, understood, and known.

Why do people like to try to figure stuff out?

Hey, welcome to earth

[Impenitent]

do we ever actually observe the movement of galaxies?

millions and millions of years ago this light was "sent" to our eyes

how do we know that they didn't go supernova millions of years ago?

the universe is collapsing in on itself, we're just far enough away not to feel it yet...

no, no, no! our observations and theories have to be the Truth...

-Imp

[Wizard22]

Almonds go into my stomach and become Dark Matter, seems simple enough?

[Age]

But why even make up theories, hypotheses, models, or anything else to then just decide what 'might be' true and right?

Why not just look at what actually is, without any pre-existing beliefs nor presumptions?

When done so properly and Correctly, then what the so-called 'present state of the Universe' is, exactly, is seen, understood, and known.

Why do people like to try to figure stuff out?

Hey, welcome to earth

Obviously you missed the 'whole point'.

Instead of 'guessing' how things/the Universe works, why not just 'look at' how they work.

For example;

When one 'looks', out of earth, there is no actual boundary. So, the Universe goes on forever, and thus is infinite, spatially.

When one 'looks', back in 'time', there is no actual beginning. So, the Universe goes on forever, and thus is eternal, temporally.

When one 'looks', at the biggest of scale, there is matter moving around continually.

When one 'looks', at the smallest of scale, there is matter moving around continually.

When one 'looks', at all, there is not just 'matter' only, there is also a 'separation', which is sometimes referred to as 'space'. At the smaller scale the 'space' between and around 'matter' can be much better seen and understood as having to be non-matter.

When one 'looks', at every creation, it comes from a re-action, of a previous action, caused or created by the coming-together of at least two other things. So, for every action there is a re-action, which creates some other thing.

When one 'looks', at and on the whole, It is in a continual state of change, through and from a continually evolving creation/reaction process. Thus, Creation, Itself, is always evolving.

The 'present' state of the Universe is the exact same as it, literally, is always HERE-NOW.

So, no one has to make up theories, guesses, et cetera of how things 'might be' to 'figure stuff out'. One just needs to 'look at' only what is actually happening and occurring HERE-NOW to 'figure out', 'see', and understand what the actual irrefutable Truth is, exactly,

[Age]

Making up theories, debating them, and then trying to decide which one might work or fit better, but which in fact might not work nor fit in at all, is just a complete and utter waste. Well to me anyway. And especially more so considering that the actual irrefutable Truth of things/stuff can be figured out, understood, and known, much much quicker and even almost instantaneously.

One just needs to 'look at' things from the Truly OPEN perspective first, and then use 'past experiences' to verify and obtain clarity.

Using 'past experiences/pre-existing beliefs and presumptions' to 'look at' things from and through first, and then make up just more assumptions/guesses/theories can take thousand upon thousands of years to not even figure stuff out and arrive at a conclusion. As was proved True hitherto when this was written.

[Age]

do we ever actually observe the movement of galaxies?

millions and millions of years ago this light was "sent" to our eyes

how do we know that they didn't go supernova millions of years ago?

the universe is collapsing in on itself, we're just far enough away not to feel it yet...

Why do you say and claim that the Universe is collapsing in on itself?

no, no, no! our observations and theories have to be the Truth...

-Imp

And, what is this in relation to, exactly?

Is your observation and theory here the Truth?

[Flannel Jesus]

Nah, I don't think that works very well. I don't think you're very good at that yourself.

[Age]

Nah, I don't think that works very well. I don't think you're very good at that yourself.

But, that has already worked. you just do not know how to do it, yet.

[Flannel Jesus]

But, that has already worked. you just do not know how to do it, yet.

Well good luck with that then. The rest of us will continue using the technology made by modern science while you figure everything out from scratch by just looking at it.

[Age]

But, that has already worked. you just do not know how to do it, yet.

Well good luck with that then. The rest of us will continue using the technology made by modern science while you figure everything out from scratch by just looking at it.

This one, still, cannot yet see and understand that everything here has already been 'figured out'. And, all that it took to do this was to just not 'make up' guesses, nor models, and to instead just 'look at' what actually exists.

The Universe is in an infinite and eternal state of change, HERE-NOW.

And that this happens is because of what the Universe is fundamentally made up of and how these cause and create the Universe 'to work' in 'the way' that the Universe does, always.