[tynpeddler]

I'm on the record as defending MOND from dismissal, but this article is taking it a step to far and ignoring important context.

It's true that MOND generally does provide a simpler[0] prediction of galactic dynamics but that's not really the selling point of Dark Matter at this point. Dark Matter works with our current understanding of the big bang[1][2], and especially with the measured anisotropies in the cosmic microwave background. There have been an attempts to fit MOND to what we know about the big bang, but so far the results have been extremely rough[2]. One possible reason for MOND's deficiencies in this area is that to date there has been far more research into Dark Matter than into MOND. It's possible that MOND does permit a more elegant explanation of the CMB. However, until we see it MOND is going to stay in second place.

Now this is very different from dismissing MOND. For some reason I can never quite figure out, every time new, big research concerning dark matter is published, lots of people who don't understand MOND pop out of the wood work to explain why it's dead.

[0] By "simpler" I mean that when predicting galactic dynamics, using MOND allows fewer free parameters than Lambda-CDM.

[1] https://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/Sept17/Freese/Freese3.ht...

[2]https://phys.org/news/2021-10-mond-theory-account-cosmic-mic...