- The researchers analyzed a diverse set of 153 galaxies, and for each one they compared the rotation speed of visible matter at any given distance from the galaxy’s center with the amount of visible matter contained within that galactic radius. Remarkably, these two variables were tightly linked in all the galaxies by a universal law, dubbed the “radial acceleration relation.” This makes perfect sense in the MOND paradigm, since visible matter is the exclusive source of the gravity driving the galaxy’s rotation (even if that gravity does not take the form prescribed by Newton or Einstein). With such a tight relationship between gravity felt by visible matter and gravity given by visible matter, there would seem to be no room, or need, for dark matter.
This, sort of, maybe, kinda explains gravity rotations. Sort of. But then you have gravitational lensing that fits the models much better and MOND cannot predict what we are now seeing with Hubble and the other large telescopes. SOMETHING is bending the light more than the visible mass can account for, and that missing mass also explains the rotation and standing wave pattern in spiral galaxies. The real reason to explain these data points is probably more interesting and weird than what we are talking about now. Just like how quantum mechanics is weird to those of us that live in the middle world. And when we figure that out? That is when we go to the stars IMO.
Found it interesting enough to track down and read the paper, it isn't paywalled BTW. Disclaimer; in reading it I understood a third, could half follow another third and the final third was beyond me - so I'm not offering expert analysis here. Thing is, he goes to pains to point out that this isn't a derivation of MOND - the article kind of sets it up as a red herring by pointing out that the result he's arrived at looks so close to the old MOND. Also, he hasn't been able to apply the math to anything but the simplest cases in the paper, but those simplest cases are suggestive of the power of the theory if we were able to grapple with the knottier, non-perfectly-spherically-symmetric problems, or things that can reasonably be simplified to such. Also the imprint of entropy being scrubbed (vaguely caught it from the paper) from the qubits that leads to the apparent extra gravity appears, in his formulation, to be resilient - it gets encoded in the space itself, rather than being explicitly and continually linked to the matter that gave rise to the effect - that's what he's referring to when he's saying in the OP that the gravitional lensing effect that appears as very strong evidence for CDM is capable of being explained in his framework. Another thing, he also points out that it isn't within the scope of the theory yet to apply it to the very early universe, the math is, ah, tough. But it will be - in my opinion - very very interesting to see what falls out after someone has a crack at applying it. Layman's perspective, if interested party - so take it for what it's worth. But it's a theory well worth keeping an eye on.
"Dark Matter" is a place holder for a behavior we can see, model, predict and test the effect of, yet cannot explain the why we see those things. Hell, we are still not 100% on what exactly gravity is. We can model it, make predictions, use it to send spacecraft across the solar system and all, but it was only in the last few years that the Higgs Field was discovered right where the predictions said it would be. New observations and data came in and the unknown became the known. "Dark Energy" same thing. SOMETHING is pushing the galaxy clusters apart and is expanding the size of the observable universe. We can observe its impact, make predictions, generate mathematical models on what it is doing, but are still in the "dark" about what is actually the root cause of the effect. The interesting and exciting thing is that the stuff we know with a very high degree of confidence is only 4% of the universe. 2/3 of all matter is a placeholder in an equation! The next 50 years of discovery are going to be mind blowing if we survive long enough to figure it all out.