Paper detail

Scale-dependent non-Gaussianities in the WMAP data as identified by using surrogates and scaling indices

We present a model-independent investigation of the WMAP data with respect to scale- dependent non-Gaussianities (NGs) by employing the method of constrained randomization. For generating so-called surrogate maps a shuffling scheme is applied to the Fourier phases of the original data, which allows to test for the presence of higher order correlations (HOCs) on well-defined scales. Using scaling indices as test statistics we find highly significant signatures for non-Gaussianities when considering all scales. We test for NGs in the bands l = [2,20], l = [20,60], l = [60,120] and l = [120,300]. We find highly significant signatures for non-Gaussianities and ecliptic hemispherical asymmetries for l = [2, 20]. We also obtain highly significant deviations from Gaussianity for the band l = [120,300]. The result for the full l-range can be interpreted as a superposition of the signatures found in the bands l = [2, 20] and l = [120, 300]. We find remarkably similar results when analyzing different ILC-like maps. We perform a set of tests to investigate if the detected anomalies can be explained by systematics. While no test can convincingly rule out the intrinsic nature of the anomalies for the low l case, the ILC map making procedure and/or residual noise in the maps can also lead to NGs at small scales. Our investigations prove that there are phase correlations in the WMAP data of the CMB. In the absence of an explanation in terms of Galactic foregrounds or known systematic artefacts, the signatures at low l must so far be taken to be cosmological at high significance. These findings strongly disagree with predictions of isotropic cosmologies with single field slow roll inflation. The task is now to elucidate the origin of the phase correlations and to understand the physical processes leading to these scale-dependent non-Gaussianities - if systematics as cause for them must be ruled out.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access8 authors2 topics

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 map preview

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.