pith. sign in

arxiv: 1906.08264 · v1 · pith:F4EFJJIZnew · submitted 2019-06-19 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · astro-ph.EP· astro-ph.GA

Directly testing gravity with Proxima Centauri

Indranil Banik , Pavel Kroupa This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 19:51 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.EPastro-ph.GA
keywords Proxima Centauriwide binaryMilgromian dynamicsNewtonian gravityastrometrylow acceleration regimegravity test
0
0 comments X

The pith

The wide binary orbit of Proxima Centauri differs between Newtonian gravity and Milgromian dynamics and can be distinguished with about 10 years of 0.5 microarcsecond astrometry.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper shows that the predicted orbital path of Proxima Centauri around Alpha Centauri changes noticeably when gravity follows Milgromian dynamics rather than Newtonian rules. Mock data generated through Monte Carlo sampling demonstrate that the difference becomes measurable with high-precision astrometry lasting roughly 10 years at an individual epoch accuracy of 0.5 microarcseconds. The time needed grows with the two-fifths power of the astrometric precision. A sympathetic reader would care because the test targets the low-acceleration regime where galactic dynamics show discrepancies. Confounding signals from a long-period planet are possible only for a narrow range of mass-to-separation ratios and specific sky positions, while perspective effects stay manageable with radial velocity known to about 10 meters per second.

Core claim

The wide binary orbit of Proxima Centauri around α Centauri A and B differs significantly between Newtonian and Milgromian dynamics. Combining previous calculations of this effect with mock observations generated using a Monte Carlo procedure shows that this prediction can be tested using high precision astrometry. This requires approximately 10 years of observations at an individual epoch precision of 0.5 microarcseconds. In general the required duration should scale as the 2/5 power of the astrometric precision. A long-period planet could produce a Milgromian-like astrometric signal but only if it has a particular ratio of mass to separation squared and a sky position close to the line of

What carries the argument

The difference between Newtonian and Milgromian predictions for the wide binary orbit of Proxima Centauri.

If this is right

  • Approximately 10 years of observations at 0.5 microarcsecond precision suffice to test the orbital difference.
  • The required observation duration scales as the 2/5 power of the astrometric precision.
  • A long-period planet produces a similar signal only if it has a particular mass-to-separation-squared ratio and lies near the line connecting Proxima Centauri to Alpha Centauri.
  • Perspective effect uncertainties remain small enough if the absolute radial velocity is known to within about 10 m/s.
  • Astrometric microlensing of Proxima Centauri is unlikely to affect the test.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same comparison of orbital predictions could be applied to other nearby wide binaries to provide additional independent checks.
  • Radial velocity zero-point improvements derived from larger samples of close binaries could make the required accuracy available sooner.
  • A positive detection of the Milgromian signal would supply a local test of modified gravity in the regime relevant to galactic outskirts.

Load-bearing premise

Uncertainties in perspective effects will be small enough if the absolute radial velocity of Proxima Centauri can be measured to within approximately 10 m/s, and that no long-period planet will produce a Milgromian-like astrometric signal unless it has a particular mass-to-separation-squared ratio and sky position.

What would settle it

Ten years of astrometric measurements of Proxima Centauri at 0.5 microarcsecond epoch precision that match the Newtonian orbit rather than the Milgromian orbit, or the reverse, would determine which description holds.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1906.08264 by Indranil Banik, Pavel Kroupa.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The proportion of Monte Carlo trials yielding a 5 sigma discrepancy with Newtonian model predictions if the true dynamics are Milgromian and 3 observations are taken each year. For a given astrometric precision, the detection probability rises rather sharply from ≈ 0 to ≈ 1 after a certain amount of time, which can be considered the required duration for the experiment to yield conclusive results. This dur… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The wide binary orbit of Proxima Centauri around $\alpha$ Centauri A and B differs significantly between Newtonian and Milgromian dynamics (MOND). By combining previous calculations of this effect with mock observations generated using a Monte Carlo procedure, we show that this prediction can be tested using high precision astrometry of Proxima Centauri. This requires ${\approx 10}$ years of observations at an individual epoch precision of $0.5 \, \mu$as, within the design specifications of the proposed Theia mission. In general, the required duration should scale as the 2/5 power of the astrometric precision. A long-period planet could produce a MOND-like astrometric signal, but only if it has a particular ratio of mass to separation squared and a sky position close to the line segment connecting Proxima Centauri with $\alpha$ Centauri. Uncertainties in perspective effects should be small enough for this test if the absolute radial velocity of Proxima Centauri can be measured to within ${\approx 10}$ m/s, better than the present accuracy of 32 m/s. We expect the required improvement to become feasible using radial velocity zero points estimated from larger samples of close binaries, with the Sun providing an anchor. We demonstrate that possible astrometric microlensing of Proxima Centauri is unlikely to affect the results. We also discuss why it should be possible to find sufficiently astrometrically stable reference stars. Adequately addressing these and other issues would enable a decisive test of gravity in the currently little explored low acceleration regime relevant to the dynamical discrepancies in galactic outskirts.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that the wide binary orbit of Proxima Centauri around α Centauri A/B differs between Newtonian and Milgromian (MOND) dynamics, and that this difference can be tested via high-precision astrometry. Combining prior MOND orbit calculations with Monte Carlo mock observations, the authors conclude that ≈10 years of data at 0.5 μas epoch precision (within Theia specifications) suffices for detection. The required duration scales as the 2/5 power of astrometric precision. Potential confounders (perspective acceleration, long-period planets with specific M/r² and sky position, microlensing, reference-star stability) are discussed, with the claim that RV accuracy of ≈10 m/s and other mitigations make the test feasible.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the work would provide a concrete, falsifiable test of gravity in the low-acceleration regime relevant to galactic outskirts. Strengths include the use of Monte Carlo mocks to quantify detectability, the explicit scaling relation, and direct engagement with external contaminants rather than dismissing them. The approach is independent of parameters fitted in the paper itself and relies on prior MOND calculations, making the prediction testable with future data.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central feasibility claim (0.5 μas over ≈10 yr) rests on the Monte Carlo procedure and error budget, yet the abstract provides no explicit equations, sampling details, or quantitative breakdown of how the signal-to-noise for the MOND–Newtonian difference is computed; without these, the 2/5 scaling and duration estimate cannot be verified as load-bearing for the headline result.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that perspective uncertainties are manageable with ≈10 m/s RV accuracy would benefit from a brief quantitative estimate of the residual perspective acceleration term after correction.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the prior MOND orbit calculations are referenced but not cited; adding the specific references would improve traceability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive assessment of the manuscript's significance and for the constructive comment on the abstract. We address the point below and propose a targeted revision to improve clarity.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central feasibility claim (0.5 μas over ≈10 yr) rests on the Monte Carlo procedure and error budget, yet the abstract provides no explicit equations, sampling details, or quantitative breakdown of how the signal-to-noise for the MOND–Newtonian difference is computed; without these, the 2/5 scaling and duration estimate cannot be verified as load-bearing for the headline result.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract is a high-level summary and does not contain the explicit Monte Carlo sampling details, error budget equations, or signal-to-noise derivation. These elements are presented in full in the main text (Sections 3–4), where the mock observations are generated from prior MOND orbit calculations, Gaussian noise is assumed at the stated epoch precision, and the 2/5 scaling is obtained by fitting the detection threshold across a range of precisions in the Monte Carlo ensemble. To make the abstract more self-contained while remaining concise, we will add one sentence summarizing the key assumptions of the Monte Carlo procedure and the origin of the scaling relation. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The paper takes the MOND orbit difference for the Proxima-Centauri wide binary from prior literature and combines it with Monte Carlo mock data to quantify the observational requirements for a future test. No quantity is fitted to data within this manuscript and then re-labeled as a prediction; the detectability claim rests on external specifications for Theia astrometric precision, radial-velocity accuracy, and the rarity of planetary mimics, all of which are stated as independent inputs rather than derived from the present work. Self-citations to earlier MOND binary calculations, if present, supply the input prediction but do not close a loop because the proposed observations remain capable of falsifying that prediction. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained and does not reduce to its own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper rests on the standard MOND framework and earlier calculations of its effect on wide binaries; no new free parameters or entities are introduced in this work.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption MOND modifies Newtonian gravity below a characteristic acceleration a0 taken from galactic data
    Invoked to produce the different orbital prediction for the Proxima system.
  • domain assumption The Proxima-Centauri wide binary lies in the low-acceleration regime where MOND and Newtonian predictions diverge
    Stated as the basis for the detectable difference.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5826 in / 1289 out tokens · 35848 ms · 2026-05-25T19:51:15.979415+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

82 extracted references · 82 canonical work pages · 9 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    J., Chanam \'e J., Ag \"u eros M

    Andrews J. J., Chanam \'e J., Ag \"u eros M. A., 2017, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stx2000 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.472..675A 472, 675

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2000 2017

  2. [2]

    J., Chanam \'e J., Ag \"u eros M

    Andrews J. J., Chanam \'e J., Ag \"u eros M. A., 2018, @doi [Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society] 10.3847/2515-5172/aac2eb , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018arXiv180504162A 2, 29

    work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/aac2eb 2018

  3. [3]

    Anglada-Escud \'e G., et al., 2016, @doi [Nature] 10.1038/nature19106 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2016Natur.536..437A 536, 437

    work page doi:10.1038/nature19106 2016

  4. [4]

    A., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18706.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.417.1621D 417, 1621

    Angus G. W., Diaferio A., Kroupa P., 2011, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19138.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.416.1401A 416, 1401

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19138.x 2011

  5. [5]

    W., 1939, @doi [Lick Observatory Bulletin] 10.5479/ADS/bib/1939LicOB.19.41B , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1939LicOB..19...41B 19, 41

    Babcock H. W., 1939, @doi [Lick Observatory Bulletin] 10.5479/ADS/bib/1939LicOB.19.41B , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1939LicOB..19...41B 19, 41

    work page doi:10.5479/ads/bib/1939licob.19.41b 1939

  6. [6]

    Bagchi B., Fring A., 2019, @doi [International Journal of Modern Physics B] 10.1142/S0217979219500188 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017arXiv170904339B 33, 1950018

    work page doi:10.1142/s0217979219500188 2019

  7. [7]

    Banik I., 2019, preprint, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2019arXiv190201857B Arxiv ( @eprint arXiv 1902.01857 )

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  8. [8]

    Banik I., Zhao H., 2015, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stv802 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.450.3155B 450, 3155

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv802 2015

  9. [9]

    Banik I., Zhao H., 2018a, SciFed Journal of Astrophysics, http://scifedpublishers.com/fulltext/the-external-field-dominated-solution-in-qumond-and-aqual-application-to-tidal-streams/22097 1, 1000008

    work page

  10. [10]

    Banik I., Zhao H., 2018b, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stx2596 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.473.4033B 473, 4033

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2596

  11. [11]

    Banik I., Zhao H., 2018c, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/sty2007 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2018MNRAS.480.2660B 480, 2660

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2007

  12. [12]

    Banik I., O'Ryan D., Zhao H., 2018, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/sty919 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.477.4768B 477, 4768

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty919 2018

  13. [13]

    E., 2016, @doi [AJ] 10.3847/0004-6256/151/2/22 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2016AJ....151...22B 151, 22

    Batygin K., Brown M. E., 2016, @doi [AJ] 10.3847/0004-6256/151/2/22 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2016AJ....151...22B 151, 22

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-6256/151/2/22 2016

  14. [14]

    C., Brown M

    Batygin K., Adams F. C., Brown M. E., Becker J. C., 2019, @doi [Physics Reports] 10.1016/j.physrep.2019.01.009 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv190210103B accepted

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2019.01.009 2019

  15. [15]

    Beech M., 2009, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2009.00718.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.399L..21B 399, L21

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1745-3933.2009.00718.x 2009

  16. [16]

    Beech M., 2011, @doi [Ap&SS] 10.1007/s10509-011-0665-2 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011Ap\

    work page doi:10.1007/s10509-011-0665-2 2011

  17. [17]

    G., Broeils A

    Begeman K. G., Broeils A. H., Sanders R. H., 1991, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/249.3.523 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991MNRAS.249..523B 249, 523

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/249.3.523 1991

  18. [18]

    Bekenstein J., Milgrom M., 1984, @doi [ApJ] 10.1086/162570 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1984ApJ...286....7B 286, 7

    work page doi:10.1086/162570 1984

  19. [19]

    and LeBlanc , F

    Belokurov V. A., Evans N. W., 2002, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05222.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002MNRAS.331..649B 331, 649

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05222.x 2002

  20. [20]

    F., et al., 1993, @doi [PASP] 10.1086/133182 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993PASP..105..487B 105, 487

    Benedict G. F., et al., 1993, @doi [PASP] 10.1086/133182 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993PASP..105..487B 105, 487

    work page doi:10.1086/133182 1993

  21. [21]

    B \' lek M., Thies I., Kroupa P., Famaey B., 2018, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731939 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017arXiv171204938B 614, A59

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201731939 2018

  22. [22]

    O., et al., 2009, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/200911976 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2009A&A...505..205D 505, 205

    Demory B. O., et al., 2009, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/200911976 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2009A&A...505..205D 505, 205

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200911976 2009

  23. [23]

    Desmond H., 2017a, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stw2571 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.464.4160D 464, 4160

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2571

  24. [24]

    Desmond H., 2017b, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnrasl/slx134 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.472L..35D 472, L35

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slx134

  25. [25]

    Duch \^e ne G., Kraus A., 2013, @doi [ARA&A] 10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102602 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ARA\

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102602 2013

  26. [26]

    El-Badry K., 2019, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/sty3109 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2019MNRAS.482.5018E 482, 5018

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3109 2019

  27. [27]

    Eriksson U., Lindegren L., 2007, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361:20078031 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A\

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20078031 2007

  28. [28]

    Famaey B., Binney J., 2005, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09474.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005MNRAS.363..603F 363, 603

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09474.x 2005

  29. [29]

    S., 2012, @doi [Living Reviews in Relativity] 10.12942/lrr-2012-10 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012LRR....15...10F 15, 10

    Famaey B., McGaugh S. S., 2012, @doi [Living Reviews in Relativity] 10.12942/lrr-2012-10 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012LRR....15...10F 15, 10

    work page doi:10.12942/lrr-2012-10 2012

  30. [30]

    Fienga A., Laskar J., Manche H., Gastineau M., 2016, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201628227 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A\

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201628227 2016

  31. [31]

    Gaia Collaboration 2016, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2016A&A...595A...1G 595, A1

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629272 2016

  32. [32]

    Gaia Collaboration 2018, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833051 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A\

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833051 2018

  33. [33]

    I., Pepe F., Molaro P., Santos N

    Gonz \'a lez Hern \'a ndez J. I., Pepe F., Molaro P., Santos N. C., 2018, ESPRESSO on VLT: An Instrument for Exoplanet Research . p. 157, @doi 10.1007/978-3-319-55333-7_157

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-55333-7_157 2018

  34. [34]

    A., Allen C., 2012, @doi [European Physical Journal C] 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1884-6 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012EPJC...72.1884H 72, 1884

    Hernandez X., Jim \'e nez M. A., Allen C., 2012, @doi [European Physical Journal C] 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1884-6 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012EPJC...72.1884H 72, 1884

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1884-6 2012

  35. [35]

    Hernandez X., Cort \'e s R. A. M., Allen C., Scarpa R., 2019, @doi [International Journal of Modern Physics D] 10.1142/S0218271819501013 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2018arXiv181008696H accepted

    work page doi:10.1142/s0218271819501013 2019

  36. [36]

    J., Payne M

    Holman M. J., Payne M. J., 2016, @doi [AJ] 10.3847/0004-6256/152/4/94 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016AJ....152...94H 152, 94

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-6256/152/4/94 2016

  37. [37]

    Hornsby T., 1771, @doi [Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London] https://doi.org/10.1098/rstl.1771.0054 , https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rstl.1771.0054 LIII, 574

    work page doi:10.1098/rstl.1771.0054

  38. [38]

    Kervella P., Mignard F., M \'e rand A., Th \'e venin F., 2016, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629201 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A\

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629201 2016

  39. [39]

    Kervella P., Th \'e venin F., Lovis C., 2017, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629930 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A\

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629930 2017

  40. [40]

    Kervella P., Arenou F., Mignard F., Th \'e venin F., 2019, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834371 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A\

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834371 2019

  41. [41]

    Kouwenhoven M. B. N., Goodwin S. P., Parker R. J., Davies M. B., Malmberg D., Kroupa P., 2010, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16399.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2010MNRAS.404.1835K 404, 1835

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16399.x 2010

  42. [42]

    Kroupa P., 2012, @doi [PASA] 10.1071/AS12005 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012PASA...29..395K 29, 395

    work page doi:10.1071/as12005 2012

  43. [43]

    Kroupa P., 2015, @doi [Canadian Journal of Physics] 10.1139/cjp-2014-0179 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015CaJPh..93..169K 93, 169

    work page doi:10.1139/cjp-2014-0179 2015

  44. [44]

    R., Blair D

    Kroupa P., Burman R. R., Blair D. G., 1989, Proceedings of the Astronomical Society of Australia, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989PASAu...8..119K 8, 119

    work page 1989

  45. [45]

    Kroupa P., et al., 2018, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-018-0622-x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018NatAs...2..925K 2, 925

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-018-0622-x 2018

  46. [46]

    G., Boss A

    Lagrange A.-M., Meunier N., Desort M., 2011, in Sozzetti A., Lattanzi M. G., Boss A. P., eds, IAU Symposium Vol. 276, The Astrophysics of Planetary Systems: Formation, Structure, and Dynamical Evolution. pp 537--538, @doi 10.1017/S1743921311021120

    work page doi:10.1017/s1743921311021120 2011

  47. [47]

    S., Schombert J

    Lelli F., McGaugh S. S., Schombert J. M., Pawlowski M. S., 2017, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/836/2/152 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...836..152L 836, 152

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/836/2/152 2017

  48. [48]

    Li P., Lelli F., McGaugh S., Schombert J., 2018, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201732547 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018arXiv180300022L 615, A3

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201732547 2018

  49. [49]

    L \"u ghausen F., Famaey B., Kroupa P., 2015, @doi [Canadian Journal of Physics] 10.1139/cjp-2014-0168 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015CaJPh..93..232L 93, 232

    work page doi:10.1139/cjp-2014-0168 2015

  50. [50]

    L., 1992, in Kaldeich B., ed., ESA Special Publication Vol

    Matson D. L., 1992, in Kaldeich B., ed., ESA Special Publication Vol. 338, Symposium on Titan

    work page 1992

  51. [51]

    S., 2011, @doi [Physical Review Letters] 10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.121303 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011PhRvL.106l1303M 106, 121303

    McGaugh S. S., 2011, @doi [Physical Review Letters] 10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.121303 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011PhRvL.106l1303M 106, 121303

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.106.121303 2011

  52. [52]

    McGaugh S., Lelli F., Schombert J., 2016, @doi [Phys. Rev. Lett.] 10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.201101 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016arXiv160905917M 117, 201101

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.117.201101 2016

  53. [53]

    J., 2017, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stw2759 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.465...76M 465, 76

    McMillan P. J., 2017, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stw2759 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.465...76M 465, 76

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2759 2017

  54. [54]

    Milgrom M., 1983, @doi [ApJ] 10.1086/161130 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1983ApJ...270..365M 270, 365

    work page doi:10.1086/161130 1983

  55. [55]

    Milgrom M., 1999, @doi [Phys. Lett. A] 10.1016/S0375-9601(99)00077-8 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999PhLA..253..273M 253, 273

    work page doi:10.1016/s0375-9601(99)00077-8 1999

  56. [56]

    Mr \'o z P., et al., 2017, @doi [Nature] 10.1038/nature23276 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017Natur.548..183M 548, 183

    work page doi:10.1038/nature23276 2017

  57. [57]

    Oehm W., Thies I., Kroupa P., 2017, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stw3381 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2017MNRAS.467..273O 467, 273

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw3381 2017

  58. [58]

    P., Peebles P

    Ostriker J. P., Peebles P. J. E., 1973, @doi [ApJ] 10.1086/152513 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1973ApJ...186..467O 186, 467

    work page doi:10.1086/152513 1973

  59. [59]

    P., Steinhardt P

    Ostriker J. P., Steinhardt P. J., 1995, @doi [Nature] 10.1038/377600a0 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995Natur.377..600O 377, 600

    work page doi:10.1038/377600a0 1995

  60. [60]

    Pau c o R., Kla c ka J., 2017, preprint, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017arXiv170509273P Arxiv ( @eprint arXiv 1705.09273 )

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  61. [61]

    Pau c o R., Kla c ka J., 2016, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201527713 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2016A&A...589A..63P 589

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527713 2016

  62. [62]

    Pazy E., 2013, @doi [Phys. Rev. D] 10.1103/PhysRevD.87.084063 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013PhRvD..87h4063P 87, 084063

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.87.084063 2013

  63. [63]

    Peebles P. J. E., 2017, preprint, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017arXiv170510683P Arxiv ( @eprint arXiv 1705.10683 )

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  64. [64]

    Perlmutter S., et al., 1999, @doi [ApJ] 10.1086/307221 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...517..565P 517, 565

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/307221 1999

  65. [65]

    Perryman M. A. C., et al., 2001, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361:20010085 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001A\

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20010085 2001

  66. [66]

    C., 1981, @doi [American Journal of Physics] 10.1119/1.12460 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981AmJPh..49..564P 49, 564

    Peters P. C., 1981, @doi [American Journal of Physics] 10.1119/1.12460 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981AmJPh..49..564P 49, 564

    work page doi:10.1119/1.12460 1981

  67. [67]

    Pittordis C., Sutherland W., 2018, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/sty1578 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.480.1778P 480, 1778

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1578 2018

  68. [68]

    G., et al., 1998, @doi [AJ] 10.1086/300499 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998AJ....116.1009R 116, 1009

    Riess A. G., et al., 1998, @doi [AJ] 10.1086/300499 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998AJ....116.1009R 116, 1009

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/300499 1998

  69. [69]

    C., Marra V., del Popolo A., Davari Z., 2018, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-018-0498-9 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018NatAs...2..668R 2, 668

    Rodrigues D. C., Marra V., del Popolo A., Davari Z., 2018, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-018-0498-9 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018NatAs...2..668R 2, 668

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-018-0498-9 2018

  70. [70]

    H., Shostak G

    Rogstad D. H., Shostak G. S., 1972, @doi [ApJ] 10.1086/151636 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1972ApJ...176..315R 176, 315

    work page doi:10.1086/151636 1972

  71. [71]

    C., Ford Jr

    Rubin V. C., Ford Jr. W. K., 1970, @doi [ApJ] 10.1086/150317 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1970ApJ...159..379R 159, 379

    work page doi:10.1086/150317 1970

  72. [72]

    S \'e gransan D., Kervella P., Forveille T., Queloz D., 2003, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361:20021714 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2003A&A...397L...5S 397, L5

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20021714 2003

  73. [73]

    J., Olling R

    Shaya E. J., Olling R. P., 2011, @doi [ApJS] 10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/2 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJS..192....2S 192, 2

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/2 2011

  74. [74]

    Smolin L., 2017, @doi [Physical Review D] 10.1103/PhysRevD.96.083523 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017PhRvD..96h3523S 96, 083523

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.96.083523 2017

  75. [75]

    Sozzetti A., 2005, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific] 10.1086/444487 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2005PASP..117.1021S 117, 1021

    work page doi:10.1086/444487 2005

  76. [76]

    Theia Collaboration 2017, preprint, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017arXiv170701348T Arxiv ( @eprint arXiv 1707.01348 )

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  77. [77]

    Tokovinin A., 2017, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stx707 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.468.3461T 468, 3461

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx707 2017

  78. [78]

    P., 2016, @doi [SciPost Physics] 10.21468/SciPostPhys.2.3.016 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016arXiv161102269V 2, 16

    Verlinde E. P., 2016, @doi [SciPost Physics] 10.21468/SciPostPhys.2.3.016 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016arXiv161102269V 2, 16

    work page doi:10.21468/scipostphys.2.3.016 2016

  79. [79]

    Zhao H., Li B., Bienaym \'e O., 2010, @doi [Physical Review D] 10.1103/PhysRevD.82.103001 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010PhRvD..82j3001Z 82, 103001

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.82.103001 2010

  80. [80]

    Zhao H., Famaey B., L \"u ghausen F., Kroupa P., 2013, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321879 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A\

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321879 2013

Showing first 80 references.