Paper detail

Missing large-angle correlations versus even-odd point-parity imbalance in the cosmic microwave background

Context. The existence of a maximum correlation angle ($θ_{max} \gtrsim 60^{\circ}$) in the two-point angular temperature correlations of cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation, measured by WMAP and Planck, stands in sharp contrast to the prediction of standard inflationary cosmology, in which the correlations should extend across the full sky (i.e., $180^{\circ}$). The introduction of a hard lower cutoff ($k_{min}$) in the primordial power spectrum, however, leads naturally to the existence of $θ_{max}$. Among other cosmological anomalies detected in these data, an apparent dominance of odd-over-even parity multipoles has been seen in the angular power spectrum of the CMB. This feature, however, may simply be due to observational contamination in certain regions of the sky. Aims. In attempting to provide a more detailed assessment of whether this odd-over-even asymmetry is intrinsic to the CMB, we therefore proceed in this paper, first, to examine whether this odd-even parity imbalance also manifests itself in the angular correlation function and, second, to examine in detail the interplay between the presence of $θ_{max}$ and this observed anomaly. Methods. We employed several parity statistics and recalculated the angular correlation function for different values of the cutoff $k_{min}$ in order to optimize the fit to the different Planck 2018 data. Results. We find a phenomenological connection between these features in the data, concluding that both must be considered together in order to optimize the theoretical fit to the Planck 2018 data. Conclusions. This outcome is independent of whether the parity imbalance is intrinsic to the CMB, but if it is, the odd-over-even asymmetry would clearly point to the emergence of new physics.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.