>Dark Matter proven wrong by new simulations using modified newton dynamics:Didn't read the paper, what a surprise. If you actually bother to look at it they don't have any comparable MOND simulation to compare to. The authors imply that MOND may be the solution, but there is nothing to back up the claim.
>>14256745Finally someone sane. The paper is retarded. These simulations have a limited resolution, and so they impose an artificial pressure floor in the interstellar medium of galaxies. This makes the simulated galaxies puffy. The fact their result changes drastically with simulation resolution debunks the claims in the paper completely. These properties are not converged. These simulations are not just dark matter, they have dozens of models to approximate the formation of galaxies. Just because you find a discrepancy with the real world doesn't mean dark matter is the problem, that's just shitty logic.
>>14254381>Mond more accurately predicts it despite also having its flaws.MOND fails in galaxy clusters. MOND fails tests of large scale structure. MOND cannot explain the Cosmic Microwave Background (pic related). CDM can. MOND only works on the scale of galaxies, not above or below. On smaller scales it has a magical off-switch called the External Field Effect, which means it cannot be tested in the solar system or stellar systems.
