Is the Universe Governed by Two Sets of Physics (At Least)?

In a debate with “galactic” and “universal” consequences, two competing models of our Universe rely upon different levels of dark matter and energy, and have different strengths and weaknesses (MOND more reliably predicts on the galactic level, LCDM on the Universe scale), yet they may also turn out to be compatible? Will the James Webb Telescope and larger supercolliders provide resolution?

The “Lambda Cold Dark Matter” theory explains an expanding Universe, using dark energy and matter as a propellant, while the “Modified Newtonian Dynamics” theory doesn’t require dark anything, yet assumes troubling amendments to Einstein’s General Relativity theory.

I will be the first to admit that I may be in over my head on this one, as the current state of Cosmology has grown beyond my ancient Astrophysics degree. Yet this Cosmological controversy seems fairly relatable and comprehendible to the average college-educated person, so here goes. LCDM (actually “Lambda Cold Dark Matter”, but my keyboard doesn’t have a Lambda character so I put in an “L”) rather reliably predicts the macroscopic observational behavior of our Universe, while relying heavily upon “dark matter” and “dark energy”, while MOND (Modified Newtonian Dynamics) is much less (or even not) reliant on Dark Matter and Energy, and more reliably predicts the Microscopic (ie Galactic) behavior of the Universe. At this point, it will be helpful to forget about those rather incidental things we call stars, planets, comets, and meteors, and consider galaxies as the smallest element of an expanding Universe, generally accepted to have originated in the “Big…