Dan M wrote:
Subject: RE: Br!n: Dark Matter / Energy in Doubt
I don't dispute anything you write, except for this. Forgive me if I am
mistaken, but my understanding was that they did not in fact have to
modify the MOG theory in order to explain the data in the case of the
bullet cluster. The paper seemed quite clear on this point. In fact
the whole reason I pointed out the paper in the first place, and what
makes it so interesting, is that they didn't have to change any of the
parameters of the theory in order to explain the Bullet cluster, whereas
Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) was apparently eviscerated by the
bullet cluster data.
Maybe Richard can weigh in on this because he was a boffin in a former life;
not just a plumber. But, if they set their parameters using earlier
observations, then I would think they would be very clear about what those
parameters were, and how they set them. If you look at landmark papers,
such as the first observations of charm, while they can be understated, to a
physicist reading their paper the results stand out clearly as if they were
in 50 pt Bold.
I don't get that with this paper, but maybe I'm missing something. Where do
they state the earlier data that they used to set their parameters?
The wikipedia page has some equations. I don't know how comprehensive
it is. It also has links to number of other interesting looking papers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalar%E2%80%93tensor%E2%80%93vector_gravity
You might try contacting the author of the theory and the paper, John
Moffat.
Second, it seems clear from the sites I quoted that they had to change their
parameters to match later observations.
Third, folks who tried to work the progress of the clusters from before
collision through the collision using their theory needed very specific
preconditions to obtain the results.
_______________________________________________
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
