Sándor:

I would suggest limiting the scope of the paper. You are proposing a mechanism for gamma-ray bursts to alter the structure of a galaxy. Whether or not you can prove that theory, by extending it to dismiss the effects of dark matter you are introducing a completely unrelated topic that is bound to make it seem like you are over-reaching. Theories of galaxy formation and shape are generally treated as being due only to their mass and interactions with other nearby galaxies (when there are such galaxies); and the question of whether that mass includes "dark matter" does not enter into "standard" theory at all.

Of course, you may be conflating the two different types of dark matter -- dark matter in galaxies, which certainly exists but has unknown nature, and dark matter between galaxies, which is believed to exist but may or may not, depending on who you talk to (most cosmologists believe it exists, but there is a sizable minority who suspect that something else may be involved). So if you feel that you absolutely must include the topic of dark matter, you should clarify which kind you are trying to do away with.

I should admit that I have not read your entire paper -- just the abstract and enough of the start to see where you are going -- but I doubt that reading any more of it would change my comments. I must also state that although I help this hopes, I am too busy with other things to actually help "edit" your paper.

Finally, I would recommend that you ignore the comments by Mr. De Mees. Though I am sure he can make statements that seem to confirm his theories, they are as far from generally accepted physics as anything I have ever read. I do not mean to insult Mr. De Mees, who is entitled to his opinions; but since you are trying to get your paper accepted, you need to realize that you should move your proposals in a direction that is closer to what the general scientific community considers acceptable, if you want that community to take notice of your work.

Thank you both for taking the time to read the manuscript and provide feedback. Courtney, I'm really grateful for your valuable insight, I'm changing the focus of the manuscript as you suggested.

Dear Sandor,

You start by saying "Our hypothesis is an alternative to dark matter theory." so I would recommend that you review all the different indications for its existence. For example, does your hypothesis explain the abundance of deuterium, the peaks of the CMB angular power spectrum, the flatness of the universe, the early formation of structure and so on. In particular this paper is highly topical and certainly relevant:

Article GW170817 Falsifies Dark Matter Emulators

Thank you very much.