Contamination cannot explain the lack of large-scale power in the cosmic microwave background radiation
Contamination cannot explain the lack of large-scale power in the cosmic microwave background radiation
复制标题
污染无法解释宇宙微波背景辐射中大规模能量的缺乏
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2008
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Austin Bourdon
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
E. Bunn;Austin Bourdon
威尔金森微波各向异性探测器的大角度宇宙微波背景（CMB）各向异性图中出现了一些异常。其中之一是缺乏大规模的电力。因为数据在其他方面与标准模型非常吻合，所以考虑标准模型的扰动作为可能的解释是很自然的。我们的研究表明，只要扰动源在统计上独立于原始CMB各向异性源，就没有这样的模型可以解释这种大规模的功率赤字。相反，任何这样的扰动总是降低获得任意给定的低尺度功率值的概率。当用二次统计量（如四极矩）量化大功率的缺乏时，我们严格地证明了这一结果。当使用基于相关函数的积分平方的统计量时，我们提供了强有力的数值证据来支持结果。该结果适用于时空几何被扰动的模型（例如，椭球宇宙），以及涉及局部污染物、未诊断前景或系统错误的解释。由于大规模的能量不足可以说是观测到的异常中最重要的，因此，即使这些解释有助于解释其他异常，如多极排列，也应该以极大的怀疑态度来看待这种差异。«少
Several anomalies appear to be present in the large-angle cosmic microwave background (CMB) anisotropy maps of the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe. One of these is a lack of large-scale power. Because the data otherwise match standard models extremely well, it is natural to consider perturbations of the standard model as possible explanations. We show that, as long as the source of the perturbation is statistically independent of the source of the primary CMB anisotropy, no such model can explain this large-scale power deficit. On the contrary, any such perturbation always reduces the probability of obtaining any given low value of large-scale power. We rigorously prove this result when the lack of large-scale power is quantified with a quadratic statistic, such as the quadrupole moment. When a statistic based on the integrated square of the correlation function is used instead, we present strong numerical evidence in support of the result. The result applies to models in which the geometry of spacetime is perturbed (e.g., an ellipsoidal universe) as well as explanations involving local contaminants, undiagnosed foregrounds, or systematic errors. Because the large-scale power deficit is arguably the most significant of the observed anomalies, explanations that worsen this discrepancy should be regardedmore » with great skepticism, even if they help in explaining other anomalies such as multipole alignments.« less