1: %% ApJ
2: %% \documentclass{aastex}
3: %%\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
4: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
5: %% \documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
6: \documentclass{emulateapj}
7: %%\usepackage{natbib}
8: \bibliographystyle{apj}
9: \usepackage{color}
10: %\slugcomment{Submitted to Astrophysical Journal Letters}
11:
12: \lefthead{Faltenbacher et al.}
13: \righthead{Galaxy alignment within dark matter halos}
14:
15: \newcommand{\hMsol}{{\,h^{-1}\rm M}_\odot}
16: \newcommand{\hMpc}{{\,h^{-1}\rm Mpc}}
17: \newcommand{\hkpc}{{\,h^{-1}\rm kpc}}
18: \newcommand{\kms}{{\,\rm km~s^{-1}}}
19: \newcommand{\Rvir}{{\,R_{\rm vir}}}
20: \newcommand{\Om}{\Omega_{\rm m}}
21: \newcommand{\Ol}{\Omega_\Lambda}
22: \renewcommand{\vec}[1]{{\mathbf #1}}
23: %%
24: \begin{document}
25: %%
26: %%-------------------------------------
27: \title{Three Different Types of Galaxy Alignment within Dark Matter
28: Halos}
29: %%-------------------------------------
30: %%
31: \author {A. Faltenbacher\altaffilmark{1}, Cheng Li\altaffilmark{1},
32: Shude Mao\altaffilmark{2}, Frank C. van den Bosch\altaffilmark{3},
33: Xiaohu Yang\altaffilmark{1}, Y.P. Jing\altaffilmark{1},
34: Anna Pasquali\altaffilmark{3} and H.J. Mo\altaffilmark{4}}
35: %%
36: \altaffiltext{1} {Shanghai Astronomical Observatory, Nandan Road 80,
37: Shanghai 200030, China}
38: \altaffiltext{2} {University of Manchester, Jodrell Bank Observatory,
39: Macclesfield, Cheshire SK11 9DL, UK}
40: \altaffiltext{3} {Max-Planck-Institute for Astronomy, K\"onigstuhl 17,
41: D-69117 Heidelberg, Germany }
42: \altaffiltext{4}{Department of Astronomy, University of Massachusetts,
43: Amherst MA 01003-9305}
44: %%
45: \begin{abstract}
46: Using a large galaxy group catalogue based on the Sloan Digital Sky
47: Survey Data Release 4 we measure three different types of intrinsic
48: galaxy alignment within groups: halo alignment between the
49: orientation of the brightest group galaxies (BGG) and the
50: distribution of its satellite galaxies, radial alignment between the
51: orientation of a satellite galaxy and the direction towards its BGG,
52: and direct alignment between the orientation of the BGG and that of
53: its satellites. In agreement with previous studies we find that
54: satellite galaxies are preferentially located along the major axis.
55: In addition, on scales $r < 0.7 \Rvir$ we find that red satellites
56: are preferentially aligned radially with the direction to the BGG.
57: The orientations of blue satellites, however, are perfectly
58: consistent with being isotropic. Finally, on scales $r < 0.1 \Rvir$,
59: we find a weak but significant indication for direct alignment
60: between satellites and BGGs. We briefly discuss the implications
61: for weak lensing measurements.
62: \end{abstract}
63: %%
64: \keywords{galaxies: clusters: general --- galaxies: kinematics and
65: dynamics --- surveys}
66: %5
67: %%--------------------
68: \section{Introduction}
69: %%--------------------
70: %%
71: A precise assessment of galaxy alignments is important for two main
72: reasons: it contains information regarding the impact of environment
73: on the formation and evolution of galaxies, and it can be an important
74: source of contamination for weak lensing measurements. In theory, the
75: large scale-tidal field is expected to induce large-scale correlations
76: between galaxy spins and galaxy shapes
77: \citep[e.g.,][]{2000ApJ...543L.107P, 2000ApJ...545..561C,
78: 2000MNRAS.319..649H, 2001MNRAS.320L...7C, 2001ApJ...559..552C,
79: 2002MNRAS.332..339P, 2002MNRAS.335L..89J}. In addition, the
80: preferred accretion of new material along filaments tends to cause
81: alignment with the large scale filamentary structure in which dark
82: matter halos and galaxies are embedded
83: \citep[e.g.,][]{2002MNRAS.335L..89J, 2005MNRAS.362.1099F,
84: 2005ApJ...627..647B}. On small scales, however, inside virialized
85: dark matter haloes, any primordial alignment is likely to have been
86: significantly weakened due to non-linear effects such as violent
87: relaxation and (impulsive) encounters
88: \citep[e.g.,][]{2002MNRAS.332..325P}. On the other hand, tidal forces
89: from the host halo may also induce new alignments, similar to the
90: tidal locking mechanism that affects the Earth-Moon system
91: \citep[e.g.,][]{1994MNRAS.270..390C, 1997ApJ...487..489U,
92: 2003ApJ...592..147F}.
93:
94: Observationally, the search for galaxy alignments has a rich and often
95: confusing history. To some extent this owes to the fact that numerous
96: different forms of alignment have been discussed in the literature:
97: the alignment between neighbouring clusters
98: \citep{1982A&A...107..338B, 1989ApJ...344..535W, 1994ApJS...95..401P},
99: between brightest cluster galaxies (BCGs) and their parent clusters
100: \citep{1980MNRAS.191..325C, 1982A&A...107..338B, 1990AJ.....99..743S},
101: between the orientation of satellite galaxies and the orientation of
102: the cluster \citep{1985ApJ...298..461D, 2003ApJ...594..144P}, and
103: between the orientation of satellite galaxies and the orientation of
104: the BCG \citep{1990AJ.....99..743S}. Obviously, several of these
105: alignments are correlated with each other, but independent
106: measurements are difficult to compare since they are often based on
107: very different data sets.
108:
109: With large galaxy redshift surveys, such as the two-degree Field
110: Galaxy Redshift Survey \citep[2dFGRS,][]{2001MNRAS.328.1039C} and the
111: Sloan Digital Sky Survey \citep[SDSS,][]{2000AJ....120.1579Y}, it has
112: become possible to investigate alignments using large and homogeneous
113: samples. This has resulted in robust detections of various alignments:
114: \cite{2005ApJ...628L.101B}, \cite{2006MNRAS.369.1293Y} and
115: \cite{2007MNRAS.376L..43A} all found that satellite galaxies are
116: preferentially distributed along the major axes of their host
117: galaxies, \cite{2006ApJ...640L.111T} found that spiral galaxies
118: located on the shells of large voids have rotation axes that lie
119: preferentially on the void surface, and \cite{2005ApJ...627L..21P} and
120: \cite{2006ApJ...644L..25A} noticed that satellite galaxies tend to be
121: preferentially oriented towards the galaxy at the center of the halo.
122:
123: In this Letter we use a large galaxy group catalogue constructed from
124: the SDSS to study galaxy alignments on small scales within dark matter
125: haloes that span a wide range in masses. The unique aspect of this
126: study is that we investigate three different types of alignment using
127: exactly the same data set consisting of over $60000$ galaxies. In
128: addition, by using a carefully selected galaxy group catalogue, we can
129: discriminate between central galaxies and satellites, and study their
130: mutual alignment. The latter is particularly important for
131: galaxy-galaxy lensing, where it can be a significant source of
132: contamination. Finally, exploiting the large number of galaxies in
133: our sample, we also investigate how the alignment signal depends on
134: the colors of the galaxies. Throughout we adopt $\Om = 0.3$ and $\Ol =
135: 0.7$ and a Hubble parameter $h = H_0/100\kms{\rm Mpc}^{-1}$.
136: %%
137: %%------------
138: \section{Data \& Methodology}
139: \label{sec:data}
140: %%------------
141: %%
142: \begin{figure}
143: \plotone{f1.eps}
144: \caption{\label{fig:sketch}
145: Illustration of the three angles $\theta$, $\phi$ and $\xi$, which
146: are used to test for halo alignment, radial alignment and direct
147: alignment, respectively. The three angles are not independent: if
148: ordered by size $\alpha\geq\beta\geq\gamma$ then
149: $\alpha=\min[\beta+\gamma,180^\circ-\beta-\gamma]$.}
150: \end{figure}
151: %%
152: %%
153: We apply our analysis to the SDSS galaxy group catalogue of Yang et
154: al. (2007, in prep.). This catalogue is constructed using the
155: halo-based group finder of \cite{2005MNRAS.356.1293Y} and applied to
156: the New York University Value Added Galaxy Catalog (NYU-VAGC)
157: \footnote{http://wassup.physics.nyu.edu/vagc/} that is based on the
158: SDSS Data Release Four \citep[DR4;][]{2006ApJS..162...38A}. This
159: group finder uses the general properties of CDM halos (i.e. virial
160: radius, velocity dispersion, etc.) to determine the memberships of
161: groups \citep[cf.][]{2006MNRAS.366....2W}. In this study we only
162: use those groups with redshifts in the range $0.01\leq z\leq 0.2$ and
163: with halo masses between $5\times 10^{12}\hMsol$ and $5 \times
164: 10^{14}\hMsol$. In addition, we only focus on group members with
165: $^{0.1}M_r - 5\log h \leq -19$. Throughout this paper all magnitudes
166: are $k+e$ corrected to $z=0.1$ following \cite{2003ApJ...592..819B}.
167: Using the method of
168: \cite{2006MNRAS.368...21L} we split our galaxies in three color bins.
169: In short, we divide the full NYU-VAGC sample in 282 subsamples
170: according to the $r$-band luminosity, and fit the $^{0.1}(g-r)$ color
171: distribution for each subsample with a double-Gaussian. Galaxies in
172: between the centers of the two Gaussians are classified as `green',
173: while those with higher and lower values for the $^{0.1}(g-r)$ color
174: are classified as `red' and `blue', respectively. The final sample,
175: on which our analysis is based, consists of $18576$ groups with a
176: total of $60724$ galaxies, of which $29780$ are red, $20604$ are
177: green, and $10340$ are blue.
178:
179: In what follows, we use these groups to examine (i) {\it halo
180: alignment} between the orientation of the brightest group galaxies
181: (BGG) and the distribution of its satellite galaxies, (ii) {\it radial
182: alignment} between the orientation of a satellite galaxy and the
183: direction towards its BGG, and (iii) {\it direct alignment} between
184: the orientation of the BGG and that of its satellites. In particular,
185: we define the angles $\theta$, $\phi$ and $\xi$ as illustrated in
186: Fig.~\ref{fig:sketch}, and investigate whether their distributions are
187: consistent with isotropy, or whether they indicate a preferred
188: alignment. Following \cite{2005ApJ...628L.101B} and
189: \cite{2006MNRAS.369.1293Y}, the orientation of each galaxy is defined
190: by the major axis position angle (PA) of its 25-magn arcsec$^{-2}$
191: isophote in the $r$-band.
192:
193: For each satellite galaxy we compute its projected distance, $r$, to
194: the BGG, normalized by the virial radius, $\Rvir$, of its group (as
195: derived from the group mass). For each of 5 radial bins, equally
196: spaced in $r/\Rvir$, we then compute $\langle \theta \rangle$,
197: $\langle \phi \rangle$ and $\langle \xi \rangle$, where $\langle .
198: \rangle$ indicates the average over all BGG-satellite pairs in a given
199: radial bin. Next we construct 100 random samples in which the
200: positions of the galaxies are kept fixed, but their PAs are
201: randomized. For each of these random samples we compute $\langle
202: \theta \rangle$, $\langle \phi \rangle$ and $\langle \xi \rangle$ as
203: function of $r/\Rvir$, which we use to compute the significance of any
204: detected alignment signal.
205: %%---------------
206: \section{Results}
207: \label{sec:results}
208: %%---------------
209: %%
210: %%--------------------------------
211: \subsection{Halo alignment}
212: \label{sec:halo}
213: %%--------------------------------
214: %%
215: \begin{figure}
216: \plotone{f2.eps}
217: \caption{\label{fig:Theta01_4}
218: Mean angle, $\theta$, between the PA of the BGG and the line
219: connecting the BGG with a satellite galaxy, as function of
220: $r/\Rvir$. Different line styles indicate (sub)samples determined
221: according to the satellites' color. The shaded areas mark the
222: parameter space between the $16^{\rm th}$ and $84^{\rm th}$
223: percentiles of the distributions obtained from the 100 random
224: samples. A signal outside this shaded region means that it is
225: inconsistent with no alignment (i.e., with isotropy) at more than 68
226: percent confidence.}
227: \end{figure}
228: %%
229: Fig.~\ref{fig:Theta01_4} shows the results thus obtained for the angle
230: $\theta$ between the orientation of the BGG and the line connecting
231: the BGG with the satellite galaxy. Clearly, for all four samples shown
232: (all, red, green and blue, where the color refers to that of the
233: satellite galaxy, not that of the BGG) we obtain $\langle \theta
234: \rangle < 45^{\circ}$ at all 5 radial bins and at high
235: significance\footnote{More than 99 percent, except for the $0.3\Rvir$
236: bin for the blue and the $0.9\Rvir$ bin for the green satellites.}.
237: This indicates that satellite galaxies are preferentially distributed
238: along the major axis of the BGG, in good agreement with the findings
239: of \cite{2005ApJ...628L.101B}, \cite{2006MNRAS.369.1293Y} and
240: \cite{2007MNRAS.376L..43A}, but opposite to the old
241: \cite{1969ArA.....5..305H} effect. Note that there is a clear
242: indication that the distribution of red satellites is more strongly
243: aligned with the orientation of the BGG than that of blue satellites,
244: again in good agreement with previous studies
245: \citep[cf.][]{2006MNRAS.369.1293Y, 2007MNRAS.376L..43A}
246: %%
247: %%---------------------------
248: \subsection{Radial alignment}
249: \label{sec:radial}
250: %%---------------------------
251: \cite{1975AJ.....80..477H} were the first to report a possible
252: detection of radial alignment in the Coma cluster, which has
253: subsequently been confirmed by \cite{1976ApJ...209...22T} and
254: \cite{1983ApJ...274L...7D}. However, in a more systematic study based
255: on the 2dFGRS, \cite{2002AJ....124..733B} were unable to detect any
256: significant radial alignment of satellite galaxies around isolated
257: host galaxies. On the other hand, using a very similar selection of
258: hosts and satellites, but applied to the SDSS,
259: \cite{2006ApJ...644L..25A} found significant evidence for radial
260: alignment on scales $\lesssim 70\hkpc$. In addition,
261: \cite{2005ApJ...627L..21P} found a statistically robust tendency
262: toward radial alignment in a large sample of 85 X-ray selected
263: clusters.
264:
265: %%
266: \begin{figure}
267: \plotone{f3.eps}
268: \caption{\label{fig:Phi01_4}
269: Same as Fig.~\ref{fig:Theta01_4}, but for the angle $\phi$ (see
270: Fig.~\ref{fig:sketch}).}
271: \end{figure}
272: %%
273: Fig.~\ref{fig:Phi01_4} shows the results obtained from our group
274: catalogue. It shows, as function of $r/\Rvir,$ the mean angle $\phi$
275: between the PA of the satellite and the line connecting the satellite
276: with its BGG. As in Fig.~\ref{fig:Theta01_4} results are shown for all
277: four different samples, together with the $16^{\rm th}$ and $84^{\rm
278: th}$ percentiles obtained from the random samples. There is a clear
279: and very significant indication that the major axes of red satellites
280: point towards the BGG (i.e., $\langle\phi\rangle < 45^\circ$), at
281: least for projected radii $r \lesssim 0.7\Rvir$. The signal for the
282: green satellites is significantly weaker, but still reveals a
283: preference for radial alignment on small scales: in fact, for the 3
284: radial bins with $r \leq 0.5\Rvir$ the null-hypothesis of no radial
285: alignment can be rejected at more than 95 percent confidence level.
286: In contrast, for the blue galaxies the data is perfectly consistent
287: with no radial alignment. Since the 2dFGRS is more biased towards blue
288: galaxies than the SDSS, this may at least partially explain why
289: \cite{2002AJ....124..733B} were unable to detect significant radial
290: alignment.
291: %%
292:
293: %%
294: %%
295: %%---------------------------
296: \subsection{Direct alignment}
297: \label{sec:direct}
298: %%---------------------------
299: The search for direct alignment has mainly been restricted to galaxy
300: clusters \citep[e.g.,][]{2003ApJ...594..144P, 2005MNRAS.359..191S,
301: 2007astro.ph..3443T}, mostly resulting in no or very weak
302: indications for alignment between the orientations of BCG and
303: satellite galaxies. \cite{2006ApJ...644L..25A} extended the search
304: for direct alignment to a samples of 4289 host-satellites pairs
305: selected from the SDSS DR4, finding a weak but significant signal on
306: scales $\lesssim 35\hkpc$. On larger scales, however, no significant
307: alignment was found, in agreement with \cite{2006MNRAS.367..611M}.
308:
309: Fig.~\ref{fig:Xi01_4} displays our results for the direct alignment,
310: based on the angle $\xi$ between the orientations of a satellite
311: galaxy and that of its BGG. With the exception of the central bin
312: ($r/\Rvir = 0.1$) the null-hypothesis of a random distribution cannot
313: be rejected at more than $1 \sigma$ confidence level. Our study, based
314: on over 40000 BGG-satellite pairs, therefore agrees with
315: \cite{2006ApJ...644L..25A} that there is a weak indication for direct
316: alignment, but only on relatively small scales: for the average group
317: mass in our sample, $M = 3.6\times10^{13}\hMsol$, a radius of
318: $r=0.1\Rvir$ corresponds to $70\hkpc$. However, at least for the red
319: satellites there is a systematic trend towards angles $<45^\circ$
320: which may be caused by the group tidal field
321: \citep[cf.][]{2005ApJ...629L...5L}.
322: %%
323: %%
324: \begin{figure}
325: \plotone{f4.eps}
326: \caption{\label{fig:Xi01_4}
327: Same as Fig.~\ref{fig:Theta01_4}, but for the angle $\xi$ (see
328: Fig.~\ref{fig:sketch}).}
329: \end{figure}
330: %%
331: %%-------------------------------------------
332: \subsection{Dependence on selection criteria}
333: %%-------------------------------------------
334: %%
335: The sample used above is based on galaxies with $^{0.1}M_r - 5\log h
336: \leq -19$. Typically, including fainter galaxies improves the number
337: statistics but not necessarily the signal-to-noise since the PAs of
338: fainter galaxies carry larger errors. To test the sensitivity of our
339: results, we repeated the above analysis using magnitude limits of
340: $-17$, $-18$, and $-20$. This resulted in alignment signals that were
341: only marginally different. We have also tested the sentitivity of our
342: results to the range of group masses considered. Changing the lower
343: limit to $10^{12} \hMsol$ or $10^{13}\hMsol$, or imposing no upper
344: mass limit, all yields very similar alignment signals. These tests
345: assure that our selection criteria lead to representative results.
346: %%
347:
348: %%
349: %%------------------
350: \section{Discussion}
351: \label{sec:diss}
352: %%------------------
353: %%
354: The origin of the halo alignment described in \S~\ref{sec:halo} has
355: been studied by \cite{2006ApJ...650..550A} and
356: \cite{2007astro.ph..1130K} using semi-analytical models of galaxy
357: formation combined with large $N$-body simulations. Since dark matter
358: haloes are in general flattened, and satellite galaxies are a
359: reasonably fair tracer of the dark matter mass distribution, $\langle
360: \theta \rangle$ will be smaller than $45^{\circ}$ as long as the BGG
361: is aligned with its dark matter halo. In particular,
362: \cite{2007astro.ph..1130K} were able to accurately reproduce the data
363: of \cite{2006MNRAS.369.1293Y} under the assumption that the minor axis
364: of the BGG is perfectly aligned with the spin axis of its dark matter
365: halo.
366:
367: \cite{2007astro.ph..1130K} also showed that the color dependence of
368: the halo alignment has a natural explanation in the framework of
369: hierarchical structure formation: red satellites are typically
370: associated with subhaloes that were more massive at their time of
371: accretion. Since the orientation of a halo is correlated with the
372: direction along which it accreted most of its matter
373: \citep[e.g.,][]{2005MNRAS.364..424W, 2005MNRAS.363..146L}, red
374: satellites are a more accurate tracer of the halo orientation than
375: blue satellites.
376:
377: The origin of the radial alignment is less clear. One possibility is
378: that it reflects a left-over from large-scale alignments introduced by
379: the large scale tidal field and the preferred accretion of matter
380: along filaments. Such alignment, however, is unlikely to survive for
381: more than a few orbits within the halo of the BGG, so that the
382: observed alignment must be mainly due to the satellite galaxies that
383: were accreted most recently. Since these satellites typically reside
384: at relatively large halo-centric radii, this picture predicts a
385: stronger radial alignment at larger radii, clearly opposite to what we
386: find.
387:
388: A more likely explanation, therefore, is that radial alignment has
389: been created locally by the group tidal field. As shown by
390: \cite{1994MNRAS.270..390C}, the timescale on which a prolate galaxy
391: can adjust its orientation to the tidal field of a cluster is much
392: shorter than the Hubble time, but longer than its intrinsic dynamical
393: time. Consequently, prolate galaxies have a tendency to orient
394: themselves towards the cluster center. The fact that the observed
395: signal increases towards the group center supports this
396: interpretation. In particular, satellites that were accreted early
397: not only are more likely to be red, they also are more likely to
398: reside at small group-centric radii and to have relatively low
399: group-centric velocities \citep[e.g.,][]{2004ApJ...616..745M}. This
400: will enhance their tendency to align themselves along the gradient in
401: the cluster's gravitational potential, and they may well be the major
402: contributors to the pronounced signal on small scales. In the case of
403: disk galaxies, the conservation of intrinsic angular momentum prevents
404: the disk from re-adjusting to the tidal field, which may explain why
405: blue satellites show no sign of radial alignment. Finally, the tidal
406: field of the parent halo also results in tidal stripping, and the
407: tidal debris may influence the inferred orientation of the satellite
408: galaxy \citep[cf.][]{2001ApJ...557..137J,2006MNRAS.366.1012F}.
409: Detailed studies are required to investigate the interplay between
410: intrinsic satellite orientations and the groups tidal field.
411:
412: In order to understand the direct alignment results, first realize
413: that the angles $\theta$, $\phi$ and $\xi$ are not independent (see
414: Fig.~\ref{fig:sketch}). However, the equation given in the caption is
415: only applicable for single cases not for the mean angles. Our results
416: indicate that satellite galaxies are more likely to be aligned
417: `radially' with the direction towards the BGG, than `directly' with
418: the orientation of the BGG. Since there is no clear theoretical
419: prediction for direct alignment, at least not one that can survive for
420: several orbital periods in a dark matter halo, while radial alignment
421: can be understood as originating from the halo's tidal field, we
422: consider the relative weakness of direct alignment to be consistent
423: with expectations.
424:
425: In recent years galaxy-galaxy (GG) lensing has emerged as a primary
426: tool for constraining the masses of dark matter halos around galaxies
427: \citep[e.g.,][]{2004AIPC..743..129B}. If satellite galaxies are
428: falsely identified as sources lensed by the BGG, which is likely to
429: happen in the absence of redshift information, the radial alignment
430: detected here will dilute the tangential GG lensing signal induced by
431: the dark matter halo associated with the BGG, thus resulting in an
432: underestimate of the halo mass. In agreement with
433: \cite{2006ApJ...644L..25A}, our findings therefore emphasize the
434: importance of an accurate rejection of satellite galaxies to achieve
435: precision constraints on dark matter halo masses from GG lensing
436: measurements. Similarly, the weak but significant detection of direct
437: alignment may contaminate the cosmic shear measurements. Since we only
438: detected a weak signal on small scales, one can easily avoid this
439: contamination by simply removing or down-weighting close pairs of
440: galaxies in projection \citep{2002A&A...396..411K, 2003MNRAS.339..711H}.
441: %%
442: \vspace{-0.02\vsize}
443: %%-------------------------
444: \section*{Acknowledgments}
445: %%-------------------------
446: %%
447: This work is supported by NSFC (10533030, 0742961001, 0742951001) and
448: the Knowledge Innovation Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences,
449: grant KJCX2-YW-T05. AF and CL are supported by the Joint Program
450: in Astrophysical Cosmology of the Max Planck Institute for
451: Astrophysics and the Shanghai Astrophysical Observatory. YPJ is
452: partially supported by Shanghai Key Projects in Basic research
453: (04JC14079 and 05XD14019).
454: %%
455: \begin{thebibliography}{50}
456: \expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi
457:
458: \bibitem[{{Adelman-McCarthy et al.}(2006)}]{2006ApJS..162...38A}
459: {Adelman-McCarthy, J.~K., et al.} 2006, \apjs, 162, 38
460:
461: \bibitem[{{Agustsson} \& {Brainerd}(2006{\natexlab{a}})}]{2006ApJ...650..550A}
462: {Agustsson}, I. \& {Brainerd}, T.~G. 2006{\natexlab{a}}, \apj, 650, 550
463:
464: \bibitem[{{Agustsson} \& {Brainerd}(2006{\natexlab{b}})}]{2006ApJ...644L..25A}
465: ---. 2006{\natexlab{b}}, \apjl, 644, L25
466:
467: \bibitem[{{Azzaro} {et~al.}(2007){Azzaro}, {Patiri}, {Prada}, \&
468: {Zentner}}]{2007MNRAS.376L..43A}
469: {Azzaro}, M., {Patiri}, S.~G., {Prada}, F., \& {Zentner}, A.~R. 2007, \mnras,
470: 376, L43
471:
472: \bibitem[{{Bailin} \& {Steinmetz}(2005)}]{2005ApJ...627..647B}
473: {Bailin}, J. \& {Steinmetz}, M. 2005, \apj, 627, 647
474:
475: \bibitem[{{Bernstein} \& {Norberg}(2002)}]{2002AJ....124..733B}
476: {Bernstein}, G.~M. \& {Norberg}, P. 2002, \aj, 124, 733
477:
478: \bibitem[{{Binggeli}(1982)}]{1982A&A...107..338B}
479: {Binggeli}, B. 1982, \aap, 107, 338
480:
481: \bibitem[{{Blanton et al.}(2003)}]{2003ApJ...592..819B}
482: {Blanton, M.~R., et al.} 2003, \apj, 592, 819
483:
484: \bibitem[{{Brainerd}(2004)}]{2004AIPC..743..129B}
485: {Brainerd}, T.~G. 2004, in AIP Conf. Proc. 743: The New Cosmology: Conference
486: on Strings and Cosmology, ed. R.~E. {Allen}, D.~V. {Nanopoulos}, \& C.~N.
487: {Pope}, 129--156
488:
489: \bibitem[{{Brainerd}(2005)}]{2005ApJ...628L.101B}
490: {Brainerd}, T.~G. 2005, \apjl, 628, L101
491:
492: \bibitem[{{Carter} \& {Metcalfe}(1980)}]{1980MNRAS.191..325C}
493: {Carter}, D. \& {Metcalfe}, N. 1980, \mnras, 191, 325
494:
495: \bibitem[{{Catelan} {et~al.}(2001){Catelan}, {Kamionkowski}, \&
496: {Blandford}}]{2001MNRAS.320L...7C}
497: {Catelan}, P., {Kamionkowski}, M., \& {Blandford}, R.~D. 2001, \mnras, 320, L7
498:
499: \bibitem[{{Ciotti} \& {Dutta}(1994)}]{1994MNRAS.270..390C}
500: {Ciotti}, L. \& {Dutta}, S.~N. 1994, \mnras, 270, 390
501:
502: \bibitem[{{Colless, M., et al.}(2001)}]{2001MNRAS.328.1039C}
503: {Colless, M., et al.} 2001, \mnras, 328, 1039
504:
505: \bibitem[{{Crittenden} {et~al.}(2001){Crittenden}, {Natarajan}, {Pen}, \&
506: {Theuns}}]{2001ApJ...559..552C}
507: {Crittenden}, R.~G., {Natarajan}, P., {Pen}, U.-L., \& {Theuns}, T. 2001, \apj,
508: 559, 552
509:
510: \bibitem[{{Croft} \& {Metzler}(2000)}]{2000ApJ...545..561C}
511: {Croft}, R.~A.~C. \& {Metzler}, C.~A. 2000, \apj, 545, 561
512:
513: \bibitem[{{Dekel}(1985)}]{1985ApJ...298..461D}
514: {Dekel}, A. 1985, \apj, 298, 461
515:
516: \bibitem[{{Djorgovski}(1983)}]{1983ApJ...274L...7D}
517: {Djorgovski}, S. 1983, \apjl, 274, L7
518:
519: \bibitem[{{Faltenbacher} {et~al.}(2005){Faltenbacher}, {Allgood},
520: {Gottl{\"o}ber}, {Yepes}, \& {Hoffman}}]{2005MNRAS.362.1099F}
521: {Faltenbacher}, A., {Allgood}, B., {Gottl{\"o}ber}, S., {Yepes}, G., \&
522: {Hoffman}, Y. 2005, \mnras, 362, 1099
523:
524: \bibitem[{{Fardal} {et~al.}(2006){Fardal}, {Babul}, {Geehan}, \&
525: {Guhathakurta}}]{2006MNRAS.366.1012F}
526: {Fardal}, M.~A., {Babul}, A., {Geehan}, J.~J., \& {Guhathakurta}, P. 2006,
527: \mnras, 366, 1012
528:
529: \bibitem[{{Fleck} \& {Kuhn}(2003)}]{2003ApJ...592..147F}
530: {Fleck}, J.-J. \& {Kuhn}, J.~R. 2003, \apj, 592, 147
531:
532: \bibitem[{{Hawley} \& {Peebles}(1975)}]{1975AJ.....80..477H}
533: {Hawley}, D.~L. \& {Peebles}, P.~J.~E. 1975, \aj, 80, 477
534:
535: \bibitem[{{Heavens} {et~al.}(2000){Heavens}, {Refregier}, \&
536: {Heymans}}]{2000MNRAS.319..649H}
537: {Heavens}, A., {Refregier}, A., \& {Heymans}, C. 2000, \mnras, 319, 649
538:
539: \bibitem[{{Heymans} \& {Heavens}(2003)}]{2003MNRAS.339..711H}
540: {Heymans}, C. \& {Heavens}, A. 2003, \mnras, 339, 711
541:
542: \bibitem[{{Holmberg}(1969)}]{1969ArA.....5..305H}
543: {Holmberg}, E. 1969, Arkiv for Astronomi, 5, 305
544:
545: \bibitem[{{Jing}(2002)}]{2002MNRAS.335L..89J}
546: {Jing}, Y.~P. 2002, \mnras, 335, L89
547:
548: \bibitem[{{Johnston} {et~al.}(2001){Johnston}, {Sackett}, \&
549: {Bullock}}]{2001ApJ...557..137J}
550: {Johnston}, K.~V., {Sackett}, P.~D., \& {Bullock}, J.~S. 2001, \apj, 557, 137
551:
552: \bibitem[{{Kang} {et~al.}(2007){Kang}, {van den Bosch}, {Yang}, {Mao}, {Mo},
553: {Li}, \& {Jing}}]{2007astro.ph..1130K}
554: {Kang}, X., {van den Bosch}, F.~C., {Yang}, X., {Mao}, S., {Mo}, H.~J., {Li},
555: C., \& {Jing}, Y.~P. 2007, MNRAS, in press (astro-ph/0701130)
556:
557: \bibitem[{{King} \& {Schneider}(2002)}]{2002A&A...396..411K}
558: {King}, L. \& {Schneider}, P. 2002, \aap, 396, 411
559:
560: \bibitem[{{Lee} {et~al.}(2005){Lee}, {Kang}, \& {Jing}}]{2005ApJ...629L...5L}
561: {Lee}, J., {Kang}, X., \& {Jing}, Y.~P. 2005, \apjl, 629, L5
562:
563: \bibitem[{{Li} {et~al.}(2006){Li}, {Kauffmann}, {Jing}, {White}, {B{\"o}rner},
564: \& {Cheng}}]{2006MNRAS.368...21L}
565: {Li}, C., {Kauffmann}, G., {Jing}, Y.~P., {White}, S.~D.~M., {B{\"o}rner}, G.,
566: \& {Cheng}, F.~Z. 2006, \mnras, 368, 21
567:
568: \bibitem[{{Libeskind} {et~al.}(2005){Libeskind}, {Frenk}, {Cole}, {Helly},
569: {Jenkins}, {Navarro}, \& {Power}}]{2005MNRAS.363..146L}
570: {Libeskind}, N.~I., {Frenk}, C.~S., {Cole}, S., {Helly}, J.~C., {Jenkins}, A.,
571: {Navarro}, J.~F., \& {Power}, C. 2005, \mnras, 363, 146
572:
573: \bibitem[{{Mandelbaum} {et~al.}(2006){Mandelbaum}, {Hirata}, {Ishak}, {Seljak},
574: \& {Brinkmann}}]{2006MNRAS.367..611M}
575: {Mandelbaum}, R., {Hirata}, C.~M., {Ishak}, M., {Seljak}, U., \& {Brinkmann},
576: J. 2006, \mnras, 367, 611
577:
578: \bibitem[{{Mathews} {et~al.}(2004){Mathews}, {Chomiuk}, {Brighenti}, \&
579: {Buote}}]{2004ApJ...616..745M}
580: {Mathews}, W.~G., {Chomiuk}, L., {Brighenti}, F., \& {Buote}, D.~A. 2004, \apj,
581: 616, 745
582:
583: \bibitem[{{Pen} {et~al.}(2000){Pen}, {Lee}, \& {Seljak}}]{2000ApJ...543L.107P}
584: {Pen}, U.-L., {Lee}, J., \& {Seljak}, U. 2000, \apjl, 543, L107
585:
586: \bibitem[{{Pereira} \& {Kuhn}(2005)}]{2005ApJ...627L..21P}
587: {Pereira}, M.~J. \& {Kuhn}, J.~R. 2005, \apjl, 627, L21
588:
589: \bibitem[{{Plionis}(1994)}]{1994ApJS...95..401P}
590: {Plionis}, M. 1994, \apjs, 95, 401
591:
592: \bibitem[{{Plionis} {et~al.}(2003){Plionis}, {Benoist}, {Maurogordato},
593: {Ferrari}, \& {Basilakos}}]{2003ApJ...594..144P}
594: {Plionis}, M., {Benoist}, C., {Maurogordato}, S., {Ferrari}, C., \&
595: {Basilakos}, S. 2003, \apj, 594, 144
596:
597: \bibitem[{{Porciani} {et~al.}(2002{\natexlab{a}}){Porciani}, {Dekel}, \&
598: {Hoffman}}]{2002MNRAS.332..325P}
599: {Porciani}, C., {Dekel}, A., \& {Hoffman}, Y. 2002{\natexlab{a}}, \mnras, 332,
600: 325
601:
602: \bibitem[{{Porciani} {et~al.}(2002{\natexlab{b}}){Porciani}, {Dekel}, \&
603: {Hoffman}}]{2002MNRAS.332..339P}
604: ---. 2002{\natexlab{b}}, \mnras, 332, 339
605:
606: \bibitem[{{Strazzullo} {et~al.}(2005){Strazzullo}, {Paolillo}, {Longo},
607: {Puddu}, {Djorgovski}, {De Carvalho}, \& {Gal}}]{2005MNRAS.359..191S}
608: {Strazzullo}, V., {Paolillo}, M., {Longo}, G., {Puddu}, E., {Djorgovski},
609: S.~G., {De Carvalho}, R.~R., \& {Gal}, R.~R. 2005, \mnras, 359, 191
610:
611: \bibitem[{{Struble}(1990)}]{1990AJ.....99..743S}
612: {Struble}, M.~F. 1990, \aj, 99, 743
613:
614: \bibitem[{{Thompson}(1976)}]{1976ApJ...209...22T}
615: {Thompson}, L.~A. 1976, \apj, 209, 22
616:
617: \bibitem[{{Torlina} {et~al.}(2007){Torlina}, {De Propris}, \&
618: {West}}]{2007astro.ph..3443T}
619: {Torlina}, L., {De Propris}, R., \& {West}, M.~J. 2007, ArXiv Astrophysics
620: e-prints
621:
622: \bibitem[{{Trujillo} {et~al.}(2006){Trujillo}, {Carretero}, \&
623: {Patiri}}]{2006ApJ...640L.111T}
624: {Trujillo}, I., {Carretero}, C., \& {Patiri}, S.~G. 2006, \apjl, 640, L111
625:
626: \bibitem[{{Usami} \& {Fujimoto}(1997)}]{1997ApJ...487..489U}
627: {Usami}, M. \& {Fujimoto}, M. 1997, \apj, 487, 489
628:
629: \bibitem[{{Wang} {et~al.}(2005){Wang}, {Jing}, {Mao}, \&
630: {Kang}}]{2005MNRAS.364..424W}
631: {Wang}, H.~Y., {Jing}, Y.~P., {Mao}, S., \& {Kang}, X. 2005, \mnras, 364, 424
632:
633: \bibitem[{{Weinmann} {et~al.}(2006){Weinmann}, {van den Bosch}, {Yang}, \&
634: {Mo}}]{2006MNRAS.366....2W}
635: {Weinmann}, S.~M., {van den Bosch}, F.~C., {Yang}, X., \& {Mo}, H.~J. 2006,
636: \mnras, 366, 2
637:
638: \bibitem[{{West}(1989)}]{1989ApJ...344..535W}
639: {West}, M.~J. 1989, \apj, 344, 535
640:
641: \bibitem[{{Yang} {et~al.}(2005){Yang}, {Mo}, {van den Bosch}, \&
642: {Jing}}]{2005MNRAS.356.1293Y}
643: {Yang}, X., {Mo}, H.~J., {van den Bosch}, F.~C., \& {Jing}, Y.~P. 2005, \mnras,
644: 356, 1293
645:
646: \bibitem[{{Yang} {et~al.}(2006){Yang}, {van den Bosch}, {Mo}, {Mao}, {Kang},
647: {Weinmann}, {Guo}, \& {Jing}}]{2006MNRAS.369.1293Y}
648: {Yang}, X., {van den Bosch}, F.~C., {Mo}, H.~J., {Mao}, S., {Kang}, X.,
649: {Weinmann}, S.~M., {Guo}, Y., \& {Jing}, Y.~P. 2006, \mnras, 369, 1293
650:
651: \bibitem[{{York, D.~G., et al.}(2000)}]{2000AJ....120.1579Y}
652: {York, D.~G., et al.} 2000, \aj, 120, 1579
653:
654: \end{thebibliography}
655: %%
656: %%\clearpage
657: %%
658: %%\begin{figure}
659: %%\plotone{f1.eps}
660: %%\caption{\label{fig:sketch}
661: %% Illustration of the three angles $\theta$, $\phi$ and $\xi$, which
662: %% are used to test for halo alignment, radial alignment and direct
663: %% alignment, respectively. The three angles are not independent: if
664: %% ordered by size $\alpha\geq\beta\geq\gamma$ then
665: %% $\alpha=\min[\beta+\gamma,180^\circ-\beta-\gamma]$.}
666: %%\end{figure}
667: %%
668: %%\clearpage
669: %%
670: %%\begin{figure}
671: %%\plotone{f2.eps}
672: %%\caption{\label{fig:Theta01_4}
673: %% Mean angle, $\theta$, between the PA of the BGG and the line
674: %% connecting the BGG with a satellite galaxy, as function of
675: %% $r/\Rvir$. Different line styles correspond to different samples,
676: %% as indicated. The shaded areas mark the parameter space between the
677: %% $16^{\rm th}$ and $84^{\rm th}$ percentiles of the distributions
678: %% obtained from the 100 random samples. A signal outside this shaded
679: %% region means that it is inconsistent with no alignment (i.e., with
680: %% isotropy) at more than 68 percent confidence.}
681: %%\end{figure}
682: %%
683: %%\clearpage
684: %%
685: %%\begin{figure}
686: %%\plotone{f3.eps}
687: %%\caption{\label{fig:Phi01_4}
688: %% Same as Fig.~\ref{fig:Theta01_4}, but for the angle $\phi$ (see
689: %% Fig.~\ref{fig:sketch}).}
690: %%\end{figure}
691: %%
692: %%\clearpage
693: %%
694: %%\begin{figure}
695: %%\plotone{f4.eps}
696: %%\caption{\label{fig:Xi01_4}
697: %% Same as Fig.~\ref{fig:Theta01_4}, but for the angle $\xi$ (see
698: %% Fig.~\ref{fig:sketch}).}
699: %%\end{figure}
700: %%
701: \end{document}
702: