Testing MOND on Small Bodies in the Remote Solar System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Modified Newtonian dynamics (MOND), which postulates a breakdown of Newton's laws of gravity/dynamics below some critical acceleration threshold, can explain many otherwise puzzling observational phenomena on galactic scales. MOND competes with the hypothesis of dark matter, which successfully explains the cosmic microwave background and large-scale structure. Here we provide the first solar system test of MOND that probes the subcritical acceleration regime. Using the Bekenstein–Milgrom “aquadratic Lagrangian” (or AQUAL) formulation, we simulate the evolution of myriads of test particles (planetesimals or comets) born in the trans-Neptunian region and scattered by the giant planets over the lifetime of the Sun to heliocentric distances of 102–105 au. We include the effects of the Galactic tidal field and passing stars. While Newtonian simulations reproduce the distribution of binding energies of long-period and Oort-cloud comets detectable from Earth, MOND-based simulations do not. This conclusion is robust to plausible changes in the migration history of the planets, the migration history of the Sun, the MOND transition function, effects of the Sun's birth cluster, and the fading properties of long-period comets. For the most popular version of AQUAL, characterized by a gradual transition between the Newtonian and MOND regimes, our MOND-based simulations also fail to reproduce the orbital distribution of trans-Neptunian objects in the detached disk (perihelion q > 38 au). Our results do not rule out some MOND theories more elaborate than AQUAL, in which non-Newtonian effects are screened on small spatial scales, at small masses, or in external gravitational fields comparable in strength to the critical acceleration.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".