USR-2026-0012 · CMB

The WMAP large-angle sky is anomalous: quadrupole 243 µK² (p = 0.052), cut-sky S_1/2 anomalous at p = 7.7×10⁻⁴ (3.2σ; 1.1×10⁻³ = 3.1σ under the literal full data path), and a 12.7° quadrupole–octopole alignment (p = 0.025). REVISED 2026-07-31: the earlier 'p < 0.0007' was a 0-of-1500 Monte-Carlo floor; the value above is measured on 10⁵ simulations with a beam-and-pixel-window-corrected null.

PROVISIONAL ~3σ (cut-sky S_1/2) reproduced ≠ discovered re-run & confirmed 2026-07-31 (R0 — founder CI; independence pending)

Re-measurement of the classic low-ℓ anomalies on WMAP 9-yr ILC with the KQ75 mask: the missing large-angle power is strongly anomalous; the quadrupole and alignment are mildly so.

Falsify-box — how to kill this claim

SURVIVED The headline 'cut-sky S_1/2 anomalous at p < 0.0007 (~3 sigma)' rests on 0 of 1500 LambdaCDM realisations falling below the observed value, so p < 0.0007 is the Monte-Carlo FLOOR (1/1500 -> 3.21 sigma), not a measured p-value. Re-run the cut-sky null in run_boundary_real.py with (i) N >= 10^5 realisations and (ii) the null skies pushed through the SAME l-space transfer as the data - the WMAP ILC 1-degree beam and the nside-512 to nside-16 ud_grade pixel window - instead of hp.synfast drawn directly at nside 16 from an unsmoothed flat D_l = 1050 plateau. The claim is DEAD if the resulting cut-sky p >= 0.00135 (the one-sided 3 sigma threshold), because the seam's headline is then not ~3 sigma, and the two remaining pieces (D_2 p = 0.052 and alignment p = 0.025, both under 2 sigma) cannot carry the statement 'the WMAP large-angle sky is anomalous'. Note the escape route here is a corrected null, not more sky - this kill test does not require new observations.

Verification record — every quoted number, re-run 2026-07-31

quantitymeasuredverdict
WMAP quadrupole D₂ 243 µK², p = 0.052 MATCH
cut-sky S_1/2 p < 0.0007 (~3σ) MATCH
quad-oct alignment 12.7°, p = 0.025 MATCH
KILL-TEST EXECUTION 2026-07-31 (10⁵ sims) original null p = 2.7e-4 (3.46σ); corrected-transfer null p = 7.7e-4 (3.17σ); literal nside-512 data path p = 1.1e-3 (3.06σ) MATCH
verdict SURVIVED and softened: '~3σ' holds on measured statistics (3.06–3.46σ across null variants); 'p < 0.0007' revised MATCH

Provenance

script: boundary_seam/run_boundary_real.py
script status: PRESENT
datasets: WMAP 9-yr ILC · KQ75 mask · claim-scripts (downloadable from /data — run it yourself)
re-run: 2026-07-31

Edges

REPRODUCES → The published WMAP large-angle anomalies (low quadrupole, S_1/2, axis alignment)

Status, honestly

kill test EXECUTED 2026-07-31 and SURVIVED: measured p = 7.7e-4 [CI 6.1e-4, 9.6e-4] sits, with its whole 95% CI, below the registered death threshold of 1.35e-3 — but the old floor 'p < 0.0007' was no longer literally true and the statement is revised, not defended. Status here is computed from evidence — the author cannot set it, and neither can we. Independent reproduction would move it; nothing else will.

§ Figures 3 from boundary_seam/run_boundary_real.py

What this claim's own script draws. These are the founder's committed outputs — the same plots the script regenerates on any machine that runs it.

real_axis.png 339.7 KB download
real_ctheta.png 112.6 KB download
real_nulls.png 92.4 KB download
Share this claim X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN Email