No excess or deficit on the largest scale of all
No detection of either excess or deficit on the largest observable scale: P/P_std = 0.09 ± 1.08, i.e. 0.84σ from standard. The data do not require extra large-scale power and cannot exclude up to about 2.2× standard. Below k = 1.5×10⁻⁴ Mpc⁻¹ the reconstruction is formally unconstrained (errors 262% to 142001%).
CORRECTED 2026-07-26: 'shows a deficit' over-read the number — 0.09 ± 1.08 is statistically indistinguishable from standard. The knots are also fitted one at a time against overlapping ℓ ranges and are therefore correlated.
Falsify-box — how to kill this claim
Verification record — every quoted number, re-run 2026-07-09
| quantity | measured | verdict |
|---|---|---|
| largest observable scale | P/P_std = 0.09 ± 1.08 → 0.84σ from standard | MATCH |
| 2σ allowed range | 0 to about 2.25× standard | MATCH |
| super-horizon scales | formally unconstrained (errors 262%–142001%) | MATCH |
| registered framing, superseded | 'shows a deficit' — not supported at 0.84σ | MATCH |
Provenance
script status: PRESENT
datasets: Planck low-ℓ TT · claim-scripts (downloadable from /data — run it yourself)
re-run: 2026-07-09
Status, honestly
CORRECTED 2026-07-26 by the kill-test sweep; the audit flag it carried is resolved. This status was assigned by hand from the public re-run audit above — it is a judgement made from that evidence, not a number this site computed for itself. What cannot move it is authority: no vote, endorsement, or say-so, from anyone including the maintainer. Independent reproduction would move it; nothing else will.
What this claim's own script draws. These are David Thompson's committed outputs — the same plots the script regenerates on any machine that runs it.