Discussion
Started 15 August 2024

Is there a galactic rotation anomaly? Is it possible to find out the speed and time of the galactic rotation anomaly?

Is there a galactic rotation anomaly? Is it possible to find out the speed and time of the galactic rotation anomaly?
Is there a galactic rotation anomaly? Is it possible to find out the speed and time of the galactic rotation anomaly?
Abstract: Orbital speeds of stars, far from centre of a galaxy, are found roughly constant, instead of reductions predicted by current gravitational theories (applied on galactic and cosmological scales). This is called the anomalous rotation of galaxies. This article intends to show that constant angular speeds of all macro bodies in a galaxy are natural phenomenon and there is no mystery about it.
Keywords: Galaxy, Stable galaxy, rotational anomaly.
A planetary system is a group of macro bodies, moving at certain linear speed in circular path around galactic centre. Central body of planetary system is by far the largest and controls mean linear speeds of all other members. Gravitational attractions between macro bodies of planetary system cause perturbations in their directions of motion, resulting in additional curvatures of their paths. When perturbed paths of smaller macro bodies are related to central body in assumed static state, we get apparent orbital paths of planetary bodies. They appear to revolve around static central body in elliptical/circular paths. Apparent orbital paths are unreal constructs about imaginary static state of central body. They are convenient to find relative positions of macro bodies in the system and to predict cyclic phenomena occurring annually. In reality, planetary bodies do not orbit around central body but they move in wavy paths about the central body. Central and planetary bodies move at a mean linear speed along their curved path around galactic centre.
Perturbations of orbital paths of macro bodies in planetary system are related directly to their matter-content and inverse square of distance from central body. Distance from central body has greater effect of magnitudes of perturbations. Hence, normally, paths of planetary bodies at greater distance from central body are perturbed by lesser magnitudes. Curvatures and thus angular speeds of their apparent orbits reduce as distance from central body increases. Since planetary system has no real spin motion, this is an imaginary phenomenon. However, many learned cosmologists seem to take spin motion of planetary system as real phenomenon and consider that members of all spinning group pf macro bodies should behave in similar manner, i.e. angular (spin) speed of members should reduce as their distance from centre of system increases.
Stable galaxy consists of many macro bodies revolving around its centre. This group can be considered as a spinning fluid macro body, rotating at a constant angular speed. Gravitational collapse initiates spin motion of galactic cloud and maintains constant spin speed of outer parts of stable galaxy. Centre part of galaxy, which is usually hidden, may or may not be spinning. We can observe only visible stars and their angular speeds about galactic centre. Linear motions of macro bodies, caused by gravitational attractions towards other macro bodies in the system, have two components each. One component, due to additional linear work invested in association with it, produces macro body’s linear motion, in a direction slightly deflected away from centre of circular path. Other component, towards centre of its circular path, is caused by additional angular work invested in association with it. This component produces angular motion of macro body.
All matter-particles in a fluid macro body, spinning at constant speed, have constant angular speeds. Consider a matter-particle at O, in figure 1, moving in circular path AOB. XX is tangent to circular path at O. Instantaneous linear speed of matter-particle is represented by arrow OC, in magnitude and direction. It has two components; OD, along tangent XX and DC, perpendicular to tangent XX and away from centre of circular path. This component, DC, represents centrifugal action on matter- C particle due to its motion in circular path. In
order to maintain constant curvature of path, X D O X matter-particle has to have instantaneous A linear (centripetal) motion equal to CE E
toward centre of circular path. If magnitudes B Figure 1 and directions of instantaneous motions are as shown in figure 1, matter-particle maintains its motion along circular path AOB at constant angular speed.
Should the matter-particle increase its instantaneous linear speed for any reason, both components OD and DC would increase. Component OD tends to move matter-particle at greater linear speed along tangent XX. Outward component DC tends to move matter-particle away from centre of its circular path. The matter particle tends to increase radius of curvature of its path. This action is usually assigned to imaginary ‘centrifugal force’. In reality expansion of radius of curvature of path is caused by centrifugal component of linear motion. Reduction in centripetal action also produces similar results.
Should the matter-particle decrease its instantaneous linear speed for any reason, both components OD and DC would reduce. Component OD tends to move matter-particle at lesser linear speed along tangent XX. Reduction in outward component DC tends to move matter-particle towards centre of its circular path. The matter particle tends to reduce radius of curvature of its path. Reduction of radius of curvature of path is caused by reduction in centrifugal component of linear motion. Increase in centripetal action also produces similar results.
In other words, matter-particle regulates its distance from centre of its circular path so that its angular speed remains constant. This is the reason for action of centrifuges. As linear speeds of matterparticles increase, they move outwards, in an effort to maintain their angular speed constant.
Additional work, done for linear motion of a matter-particle and additional work, done for its angular motion are entirely separate and distinct. Additional work for linear motion of a matter-particle can produce only linear motion and additional work for angular motion can produce only angular motion. In the case, explained above, increased in linear speed of matter-particle is considered. That is, additional work invested in association with matter-particle is of linear nature. It can only increase its linear motion. As no additional work for angular motion is invested matter-particle cannot change its angular speed. Instead, matter-particle is compelled to move away from centre of its rotation, so that it can increase magnitude of linear motion while keeping magnitude of angular motion constant.
Similarly, increase in centripetal effort invests additional work required for angular motion of matterparticle. Matter-particle tends to increase magnitude of its angular motion. Curvature of its path
increases by reducing its distance from centre of circular path. Matter-particle tends to move towards centre of circular path, so that it can increase its angular speed while keeping its linear speed constant.
Every macro body in a stable galaxy behaves in a manner similar to matter-particle, represented in figure 1. They tend to position themselves in the system, so that their linear and angular speeds match corresponding works associated with them. Macro bodies strive to maintain their angular speeds constant by keeping appropriate distance from centre of rotation. Macro bodies towards the central region may experience additional centripetal effort. They might increase their angular motion and move towards central point to merge with black hole present there. In due course of time, macro bodies on outer fringes move away from galaxy and destroy its stability.
In a galaxy, various macro bodies arrive at their relative position gradually by error and trial, during which their relative positions and linear and angular speeds are stabilized. Galaxy, as a whole, stabilizes only when constituent macro bodies have reached their steady relative positions and motions. In order to maintain stability, it is essential to maintain relative positions of all constituent macro bodies by having constant and equal angular speeds and linear speeds corresponding to their distances from galactic centre. Change in relative position or linear or angular speed of even one macro body is liable to destabilize the galaxy.
As and when superior 3D matter-particles at the fringe of galaxies attain linear speeds approaching speed of light, they break-down into primary 3D matter-particles and produce halo around equatorial region. Halos of neighbouring stable galaxies interact to prevent their translational movements and maintain steady state of universe.
Therefore constant angular speeds of constituent macro bodies of stable galaxies are their natural states. There are no mysteries or anomalies about them. This phenomenon is mystified by those who consider imaginary spin motions of planetary systems are real. Therefore, assumptions of dark matter, time dilation, modification of gravitational laws, etc and complicated mathematical exercises are irrational and unnecessary to prove non-existing rotation anomaly of galaxies.
Conclusion:
Galactic rotation anomaly is a non-existing phenomenon derived from imaginary spin motions of planetary systems about their central bodies in assumed static states. Constant angular speeds of stars in a galaxy confirm static state of galactic center (in space), rather than produce an anomaly.
Reference:
[1] Nainan K. Varghese, MATTER (Re-examined), http://www.matterdoc.info
Reply to this discussion
Chuck A Arize added a reply
5 hours ago
Yes, there is a galactic rotation anomaly observed as the discrepancy between the predicted and actual rotation speeds of galaxies. This anomaly, often attributed to dark matter, shows that the outer regions of galaxies rotate faster than expected. Measuring the speed and time of this rotation anomaly involves detailed observations of galactic rotation curves and modeling, which reveal the velocity profile and suggest the presence of unseen mass influencing the rotation.
Abdul Malek added a reply
3 hours ago
Abbas Kashani > "Is there a galactic rotation anomaly?"
There is a galactic rotation anomaly, but only according to officially accepted theories of gravity and the (Big Bang) theory of the formation of the galaxies inferred for a finite, closed and a created (in the finite past) universe.
But all these theories based on causality and theology are wrong! The dialectical and scientific view is that the universe is Infinite, Eternal and Ever-changing, mediated by dialectical chance and necessity. Gravity is a dialectical contradiction of the unity of the opposites of attraction and repulsion (due to inherent free motion of matter particles, vis viva). In short (human) time scale, new galaxies are seen to be formed through the dissipation and/or ejection of matter in the form of stars, star clusters or even a large part of the galaxy as quasars from the existing galaxies.
So, the observed high orbital velocities of the starts, star clusters etc. at the periphery of the galaxies and of the planets at the periphery of the planetary systems within the galaxies is just a natural phenomena and there is no anomaly!
"Ambartsumian, Arp and the Breeding Galaxies" : http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V12NO2PDF/V12N2MAL.pdf
KEPLER -NEWTON -LEIBNIZ -HEGEL Portentous and Conflicting Legacies in Theoretical Physics, Cosmology and in Ruling https://www.rajpub.com/index.php/jap/article/view/9106
"THE CONCEPTUAL DEFECT OF THE LAW OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION OR ‘FREE FALL’: A DIALECTICAL REASSESSMENT OF KEPLER’S LAWS":
Article THE CONCEPTUAL DEFECT OF THE LAW OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION OR...
📷
Preston Guynn added a reply
4 days ago
Your discussion question statement is:
  • "Is there a galactic rotation anomaly? Is it possible to find out the speed and time of the galactic rotation anomaly? Orbital speeds of stars, far from centre of a galaxy, are found roughly constant, instead of reductions predicted by current gravitational theories (applied on galactic and cosmological scales). This is called the anomalous rotation of galaxies."
The limit of galactic rotation velocity is expected because rotation minus precession has a maximum velocity. Our solar system's relative rotation velocity with respect to the Milky Way galaxy is at this maximum, and as a fraction of speed of light the observed velocity can be designated vg/c, and is determined in the single page proof of the quantum of resistance:
Article The Physical Basis of the Quantum of Resistance is Relativis...
The detailed proofs are in:
Article Thomas Precession is the Basis for the Structure of Matter and Space
Note that the observed velocity is the difference between rotation and precession.
📷
Dale Fulton added a reply
3 days ago
The galactic rotation "anomaly" (flat rotation curve) is actually a misinterpretation of the measurements of the galactic rotations, when performed with spectrographic (redshift) measurements. This has misled astronomers since the inception of the spectrographic velocity measurements, as being totally doppler shift, whereas they contain many non-linear components of redshift due to gases and other effects from each galaxy. Recent measurements of the Milky Way galaxy rotation curve prove that this is the case, i.e, that spectrographic velocities are misleading, and that proper motion or parallax is the only way to accurately measure those velocities.
📷
André Michaud added a reply
20 hours ago
There is no galactic rotation anomaly. Such a concept emerges from the lack of careful study of past historical discoveries about orbital structures in the universe established since Ticho Brahe first collected his data about the planetary orbits in the solar system, from which Johannes Kepler abstracted his 3 laws, that were then mathematically confirmed by Newton.
The galactic rotation parameters are well known by those who studied the true foundation of astrophysics. Put in perspective in this article:
Article Inside Planets and Stars Masses
📷
Abbas Kashani added a reply
44 seconds ago
Preston Guynn
Dale Fulton
André Michaud
Greetings and politeness and respect to the great and respected professors and astronomers, I am very grateful for your efforts, dear ones. Thank you and thank you
Abbas Kashani
Mohaghegh Ardabili University

All replies (1)

Forrest Noble
Pantheory Research Org.
Of course there is. It can be easily determined for spiral galaxies. Many have what is called a flat rotation curve, meaning the velocity of its stars is the same all over the galaxy, regardless of their distances from the galactic center, totally contrary to mainstream gravity theory.
The anomaly is simply stellar velocities which is distance traveled per unit time. The mainstream presently attributes this anomaly to what they assert to be unknown matter. But this is a very week hypothesis since it requires about 6 times more unseen matter than observable matter, and even then it is a very poor predictor of stellar velocities.There are many more better predictors of stellar velocities than dark matter which may be the worst of all predictors. But most alternatives are Modified Gravity proposals, which are usually much better predictors, but have there own serious theoretical problems.

Similar questions and discussions

On the importance of the research of mathematicians older than forty years.
Discussion
4 replies
  • José Alfonso López NicolásJosé Alfonso López Nicolás
It is well known that Medal Fields Prize is intended for excellent research of mathematicians under forty years old because many mathematicians think that the main contributions in the life of the researchers are obtained when they are younger than forty. I do not believe so. It is true, by common experience, that the students of Mathematics, which are constantly in interaction at the same time, with several (and sometimes, very different) subjects, develop a high degree of good ideas which inspire them and lead them to obtain new and interesting results. This interaction between different branches is expected to remain (more or less consciently) up to forty years old. By the same reason, if necessary, whoever researcher, independently of his/her age, may return to study the different mathematical matters and create new important contributions, even in his/her very definite area of research. Furthemore, it may help to overcome a blockade. It is incredible the fact that when one studies again different matters it inspires you, and combined with your experience and knowledge, you see the contents of these different subjects with new perspective, often helping in your area of research creating new knowledge and solving problems. This is the motive why I believe that the career of each mathematician is always worthly and continuous independently of his/her age as demonstrated by most senior mathematicians in all the areas of research who are living examples for us.
What is your opinion on the relationship between the age of a researcher and the quality of his/her contributions?
Thank you very much beforehand.
The pymcdm-reidentify tool: Advanced methods for MCDA model re-identification
Discussion
Be the first to reply
  • Nolberto MunierNolberto Munier
# 177
Dear Bartłomiej Kizielewicz, Wojciech Sałabun
I read your paper
The pymcdm-reidentify tool: Advanced methods for MCDA model re-identification
My comments
1- This is the first time that I hear about reidentification in MCDM, and really, I am puzzled.
First of all, what is reidentification?
As I can gather you try, using the Python library, to perform some sort of inverse engineering, in order to recreate or learn on some concepts like criteria weights values from old projects, and perhaps using different techniques. Please forgive me if I misunderstood. But this involves, as my understanding, that you accept that the rankings on similar projects are correct and thus you try to recover then.
Immediately two questions come to my mind:
a) Is there any proof that they were correct?
b) It appears that you work with similar projects, but it does not mean that what the stakeholders wished and demanded in the old project, can be applied to a new one. Even similar projects from a same company, addressing the same objective, may have different demands, and values.
I normally try to avoid mathematical formulas and instead, I question the rationality of procedures. That is, I deal with facts not with theories and assumptions, which may be correct, if it can be demonstrated that they are, something that nobody can.
2- In page 2 you say “These methods allow structuring the decision-making process by providing tools for formally modeling the decision maker’s preferences”.
In my opinion, this is a very general statement, because there are MCDM that do not need DM’s preferences, which, as you know, are based in non-mathematical bases, especially AHP. I do not know your opinion, but as far as I know, there is only one reality, that is not contingent to intuition or the different opinions of other DMs. This point has been extensively discussed from the verry beginning, possibly in the eighties, and really, I found incompressible that is still in use.
In addition, criteria weights are useless, for other than producing a relative ranking among criteria, they do not have any role for evaluation of alternatives. Shannon’s Theorem is very clear about it. Therefore, why people is still even considering them?
3. Page 3 “Each MCDA/MCDM method can generate different results depending on how the weights and criteria are defined and the algorithm used to process them”
It is true that different methods normally produce different results, probably due to the algebraic structure of each one, most of them without mathematical support, let alone reasoning.Therefore, as it very often happens, we can get as many rankings as methods, and rarely some with coincidence. Thus, what are they useful for, even coming from metaheuristics, since the put the DM in square one? We need a solution, not a serires of solutions.
4- In page 3 you refer to rank reversal paradox, because they can destroy invariance. Now why there should be invariance hen you add/delete an alternative. Where is the proof of it? As an example, I have cited many times. All feasible solutions of a problem are contained in a geometrical figure or common space, like a rectangle. If you have 2 alternatives subject to many criteria, most probably the solution of the problem is at the intersection of criteria, and this is pure mathematics.
If you add an alternative to the same problem, it could be that the common space now a polygon, that may give the same result, but most probable not, because now you have a cube that not only incorporate the former solution but adds new dimensions with maybe other solutions. There is no reason that invariance should be preserved in the new dimension, so RR is the product of a geometric transformation and can be completely at random, because it depends on the values of the new vector inputted
If you want, we can discuss in extense about RR, either publicly or in private.
5- Page 4 “…. difficulties in finding an expert with expertise in multiple fields simultaneously”
I agree 100% with your assertion, because I have been saying the same during years. If the criteria involve say 10 different fields, nobody can pretend that the DM be an expert in all of them, even if there are 10 different experts, since the expert in health cannot discuss with the other experts in engineering, financing, environment, transportation, etc. However, AHP ignores that fact and happily assumes that experts can produce quantitative comparisons in all fields
All these assumptions except EV, or the geometrical mean, do not have the minimum mathematical support, let along reasoning. Unfortunately, this lack of common sense, ignoring reality, addressing a problem as it is, incorporating as truth invented weights, is common in most MCDM methods and nothing is done to improve it.
These are my comments
Nolberto Munier
2) How is the formation of the universe?
Discussion
2 replies
  • Abbas KashaniAbbas Kashani
2) How is the formation of the universe?
The universe, at its most fundamental level, appears to operate according to the principles of quantum mechanics, where uncertainty and indeterminacy play key roles in shaping its evolution. In classical computational theory, Turing’s Halting Problem demonstrates that it is impossible to predict whether a system will reach a final state or run indefinitely. This raises profound questions about the nature of the universe: could it, too, one day halt, reaching a state where no further evolution is possible? However, the inherent unpredictability of quantum mechanics—through phenomena like superposition, quantum fluctuations, and entanglement—may offer a safeguard against such a scenario. This paper explores the intersection of quantum mechanics and the Halting Problem, suggesting that quantum uncertainty prevents the universe from settling into a static, final state. By continuously introducing randomness and variation into the fabric of reality, quantum processes ensure the universe remains in perpetual motion, avoiding a halting condition. We will examine the scientific and philosophical implications of this theory and its potential to reshape our understanding of cosmology.
Stam Nicolis added a reply:
The evolution of the universe, from the inflationary epoch onwards, is described by classical, not quantum, gravity.
Stam Nicolis added a reply:
Turing's halting problem doesn't have anything to do with the subject of cosmology, or any subject, where the equations that describe the evolution of the system under study are known.
In particular the answer to the question of the evolution of the universe is known: It's described by the de Sitter solution to Einstein's equations, that is its expansion is accelerating, although with a very slow rate. The question, whose answer isn't, yet, known is what happened before the inflationary epoch. It is for this question that a new theory is needed, that can match to classical description of spacetime and the quantum description of matter that emerged from it.
Stam Nicolis added a reply:
That quantum mechanics provides a probabilistic description isn't particular to it. Classical mechanics, also provides a probabilistic description, since classical systems are, typically, chaotic and integrable systems are the exception, not the rule. The only difference between a quantum system and its classical limit is the space of states.
Does "dark matter" make up large proportions of those galaxies?
Discussion
2 replies
  • Abbas KashaniAbbas Kashani
Does "dark matter" make up large proportions of those galaxies?
Newtonian gravity behaves differently at very large scales of mass and distance, i.e., galaxy scales, in contra-indication to the assumption that massive quantities of invisible, or "dark matter" make up large proportions of those galaxies.
… Read more
  • 717 kB27.pdf
Preston Guynn added a reply
Your discussion statement question is:
  • "Does 'dark matter' make up large proportions of those galaxies? Newtonian gravity behaves differently at very large scales of mass and distance, i.e., galaxy scales, in contra-indication to the assumption that massive quantities of invisible, or 'dark matter' make up large proportions of those galaxies."
The phrase "Newtonian gravity" refers to a very specific equation relating mass and acceleration, so saying it behaves differently under some condition is not a correct usage of the phrase. Newtonian gravity is Newtonian gravity, and it gives incorrect results at scales greater than the solar system. There is a significant body of research on modified Newtonian gravity, and you can find it by searching on the phrase or "MOND".
Your question"Does dark matter make up large proportion of those galaxies?" is the question that numerous branches of research are investigating either experimentally or theoretically. First of course is the search for any experimental evidence of any matter that couples gravitationally but not via the electromagnetic field. No evidence of any such matter has been found. Second is that there is no such matter expected from current models such as the so called standard model of physics.
Even if there were some type of matter that couples gravitationally but not via electro-magnetic coupling, the number of non-conforming physical observations cannot be solved by such matter. The galaxies not only have a rotation that is unexplained by GR, but the galaxies interacting in clusters, and the clusters of galaxies interacting in superclusters could not simultaneously be described by such matter regardless of its distribution patterns. Additionally, gravitational lensing observed due to galaxies and clusters of galaxies could not be described by GR simply by applying such conjectured matter. The number of non-conforming observations cannot be solved by adding matter or energy, so general relativity should be abandoned as a dead end. Newtonian gravity does not apply, and no known modification of Newtonian gravity describes all the observed interactions. Modern physics will only progress when GR is abandoned and my research based on special relativity is adopted. See
Article The Physical Basis of the Fine Structure Constant in Relativ...
Article Thomas Precession is the Basis for the Structure of Matter and Space
For some insights on dark matter see :
Article Cold Dark Matter and Strong Gravitational Lensing: Concord o...
Abbas Kashani added a reply
Dear and respected Preston Gan
Researcher in Guynn Engineering
United States of America
You answered my question very well. Thank you very much for your excellent and technical explanations. You made me proud and I am happy for you because you are a great scientist. Thank you Abbas
Jouni Laine added a reply
According to my theory, the influence of quantum entanglement on spacetime curvature could provide an alternative explanation for the gravitational effects attributed to dark matter in galaxies. Traditional models suggest that large proportions of invisible “dark matter” are required to account for the observed gravitational behavior at galaxy scales. This is because, under Newtonian gravity, the visible mass of galaxies cannot account for the gravitational forces observed, leading to the hypothesis that there must be additional, unseen mass—dark matter.
However, my research proposes that quantum entanglement could be influencing spacetime curvature in a way that mimics the effects of this “missing” dark matter. If quantum entanglement can alter the curvature of spacetime, it might enhance the gravitational pull within galaxies without requiring massive quantities of unseen matter. This would mean that the observed discrepancies at galactic scales could be due to quantum entanglement effects rather than vast amounts of dark matter.
In this view, while dark matter has been the dominant explanation, it might be possible that the gravitational anomalies are instead the result of entanglement-induced modifications to spacetime. This theory could offer a new perspective on why Newtonian gravity appears to behave differently at large scales, suggesting that the need for dark matter could be reconsidered in light of quantum effects on gravity.
Abbas Kashani added a reply
Dear Johnny Line, greetings and respect
You answered my question very well. Thank you very much for your excellent and technical explanations. You made me proud and I am happy for you because you are a great scientist. Thank you Abbas
Forrest Noble added a reply
2 days ago
No ! Dark Matter, like Dark Energy, is simply a 'place holder' for an unknown source of energy which cannot presently be explained excepting via speculation and related hypotheses. If either or both do not exist, their replacement will do damage to, or also cause the replacement of mainstream cosmology, by far simpler but presently unrecognized alternative(s).
Courtney Seligman added a reply
4 hours ago
It is conceivable that the constant "G" varies according to where you are, but the only way to prove that is to be somewhere so far from here that we will never be able to prove it, which makes it a novel but scientifically pointless proposition (if there is no way to prove something, it cannot be considered scientifically reasonable because then you can invent thousands of explanations, only one of which (if any) that can be correct, which is a doomed explanation). "G" is certainly a constant everywhere within 30 thousand light-years from us, and there will never be any way to measure its value even at that distance, let alone hundreds of thousands or millions of light-years distant. So at the moment I would say that "dark matter" almost certainly exists IN GALAXIES, and possibly BETWEEN GALAXIES IN RICH CLUSTERS OF GALAXIES. However, whether it exists in the huge amounts posited by cosmologists EVERYWHERE is certainly "up in the air" in every sense of the phrase. And I'm reasonably certain that "dark energy" is a fantasy made up to explain something that doesn't need explaining.
Recommend
Share
Does "dark matter" make up large proportions of those galaxies?
Discussion
2 replies
  • Abbas KashaniAbbas Kashani
Does "dark matter" make up large proportions of those galaxies?
Newtonian gravity behaves differently at very large scales of mass and distance, i.e., galaxy scales, in contra-indication to the assumption that massive quantities of invisible, or "dark matter" make up large proportions of those galaxies.
… Read more
  • 717 kB27.pdf
Preston Guynn added a reply
Your discussion statement question is:
  • "Does 'dark matter' make up large proportions of those galaxies? Newtonian gravity behaves differently at very large scales of mass and distance, i.e., galaxy scales, in contra-indication to the assumption that massive quantities of invisible, or 'dark matter' make up large proportions of those galaxies."
The phrase "Newtonian gravity" refers to a very specific equation relating mass and acceleration, so saying it behaves differently under some condition is not a correct usage of the phrase. Newtonian gravity is Newtonian gravity, and it gives incorrect results at scales greater than the solar system. There is a significant body of research on modified Newtonian gravity, and you can find it by searching on the phrase or "MOND".
Your question"Does dark matter make up large proportion of those galaxies?" is the question that numerous branches of research are investigating either experimentally or theoretically. First of course is the search for any experimental evidence of any matter that couples gravitationally but not via the electromagnetic field. No evidence of any such matter has been found. Second is that there is no such matter expected from current models such as the so called standard model of physics.
Even if there were some type of matter that couples gravitationally but not via electro-magnetic coupling, the number of non-conforming physical observations cannot be solved by such matter. The galaxies not only have a rotation that is unexplained by GR, but the galaxies interacting in clusters, and the clusters of galaxies interacting in superclusters could not simultaneously be described by such matter regardless of its distribution patterns. Additionally, gravitational lensing observed due to galaxies and clusters of galaxies could not be described by GR simply by applying such conjectured matter. The number of non-conforming observations cannot be solved by adding matter or energy, so general relativity should be abandoned as a dead end. Newtonian gravity does not apply, and no known modification of Newtonian gravity describes all the observed interactions. Modern physics will only progress when GR is abandoned and my research based on special relativity is adopted. See
Article The Physical Basis of the Fine Structure Constant in Relativ...
Article Thomas Precession is the Basis for the Structure of Matter and Space
For some insights on dark matter see :
Article Cold Dark Matter and Strong Gravitational Lensing: Concord o...
Abbas Kashani added a reply
Dear and respected Preston Gan
Researcher in Guynn Engineering
United States of America
You answered my question very well. Thank you very much for your excellent and technical explanations. You made me proud and I am happy for you because you are a great scientist. Thank you Abbas
Jouni Laine added a reply
According to my theory, the influence of quantum entanglement on spacetime curvature could provide an alternative explanation for the gravitational effects attributed to dark matter in galaxies. Traditional models suggest that large proportions of invisible “dark matter” are required to account for the observed gravitational behavior at galaxy scales. This is because, under Newtonian gravity, the visible mass of galaxies cannot account for the gravitational forces observed, leading to the hypothesis that there must be additional, unseen mass—dark matter.
However, my research proposes that quantum entanglement could be influencing spacetime curvature in a way that mimics the effects of this “missing” dark matter. If quantum entanglement can alter the curvature of spacetime, it might enhance the gravitational pull within galaxies without requiring massive quantities of unseen matter. This would mean that the observed discrepancies at galactic scales could be due to quantum entanglement effects rather than vast amounts of dark matter.
In this view, while dark matter has been the dominant explanation, it might be possible that the gravitational anomalies are instead the result of entanglement-induced modifications to spacetime. This theory could offer a new perspective on why Newtonian gravity appears to behave differently at large scales, suggesting that the need for dark matter could be reconsidered in light of quantum effects on gravity.
Abbas Kashani added a reply
Dear Johnny Line, greetings and respect
You answered my question very well. Thank you very much for your excellent and technical explanations. You made me proud and I am happy for you because you are a great scientist. Thank you Abbas

Related Publications

Chapter
This article focuses on Trinitarian theology during the period from the late eighth century to the beginning of the twelfth century. It considers the works of Alcuin of York, Anselm of Canterbury, Gottschalk of Orbais, and John Scotus Eriugena. It explains that Alcuin's work on the undivided Trinity defended the Augustinian emphasis on the divine u...
Got a technical question?
Get high-quality answers from experts.