1: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2: \begin{document}
3: \title{Comparison between the Blue and the Red Galaxy Alignments detected
4: in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey}
5: \author{Jounghun Lee}
6: \affil{Department of Physics and Astronomy, FPRD, Seoul National University,
7: Seoul 151-747, Korea}
8: \email{jounghun@astro.snu.ac.kr}
9: \author{Ue-Li Pen}
10: \affil{Canadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics, Toronto, ON M5S 3H8,
11: Canada}
12: \email{pen@cita.utoronto.ca}
13:
14: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
15: \begin{abstract}
16: We measure the intrinsic alignments of the blue and the red galaxies
17: separately by analyzing the spectroscopic data of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey
18: Data Release 6 (SDSS DR6). For both samples of the red and the blue galaxies
19: with axial ratios of $b/a\le 0.8$, we detect a $3\sigma$ signal of the
20: ellipticity correlation in the redshift range of $0\le z\le 0.4$ for $r$-band
21: absolute (model) magnitude cut of $M_{r}\le -19.2$ (no $K$ correction).
22: We note a difference in the strength and the distance scale for the red and
23: the blue galaxy correlation $\eta_{2D}(r)$: For the bright blue galaxies,
24: it behaves as a quadratic scaling of the linear density correlation of
25: $\xi(r)$ as $\eta_{2D}(r)\propto\xi^{2}(r)$ with strong signal detected only
26: at small distance bin of $r\le 3h^{-1}$Mpc.
27: While for the bright red galaxies it follows a linear scaling as
28: $\eta_{2D}(r)\propto\xi(r)$ with signals detected at larger distance out to
29: $r\sim 6h^{-1}$Mpc. We also test whether the detected correlation signal is
30: intrinsic or spurious by quantifying the systematic error and find that the
31: effect of the systematic error on the ellipticity correlation is negligible.
32: It is finally concluded that our results will be useful for the weak lensing
33: measurements as well as the understanding of the large scale structure
34: formation.
35: \end{abstract}
36: \keywords{cosmology:observations --- methods:statistical ---
37: large-scale structure of universe}
38: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
39:
40: It has been long suspected that the galaxies may have preferential directions
41: in the orientations of their elliptical shapes (or spin axes) with being
42: locally correlated between the neighbors, which is often called the galaxy
43: intrinsic alignments. Since the galaxy intrinsic alignments could in principle
44: contaminate weak lensing signals
45: \citep[e.g.,][and references therein]{hir-etal07}, the measurement of its
46: existence and strength from observations has been a prior interest especially
47: of the weak lensing community.
48:
49: It has been claimed by \citet{man-etal06} that no signal of ellipticity
50: correlation between the neighbor galaxies was detected in the spectroscopic
51: data from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey \citep[SDSS,][]{yor-etal00}, although
52: they mentioned that their results are statistically consistent with
53: previous observational evidences for the existence of the galaxy intrinsic
54: alignments \citep{bro-etal02,hey-etal04}.
55: Extrapolating their results to redshift $z=1$ relevant for the weak lensing
56: shear, they have drawn a tentative conclusion that the intrinsic ellipticity
57: correlations between the neighbor galaxies would not cause any significant
58: errors for the estimation of the power spectrum amplitude of the initial
59: density field.
60:
61: Very recently, however, a numerical analysis based on the high-resolution
62: N-body simulation has demonstrated with high statistical power that strong
63: ellipticity correlations between the dark matter halos exist at large
64: distances out to $10h^{-1}$Mpc \citep{lee-etal07}. Therefore, it is necessary
65: and important to reexamine observationally the existence and significance
66: of the galaxy intrinsic alignments by analyzing the SDSS data.
67:
68: The physical mechanism for the generation of the galaxy intrinsic alignments
69: differ between the blue and the red galaxies. For the blue spiral galaxies
70: which are usually rotationally supported, the intrinsic alignments refer to
71: the correlations of the spin axes originated from the initial tidal field.
72: The linear tidal torque theory explains that the intrinsic correlation
73: should exist only locally between close galaxy pairs, whose functional
74: form is predicted to be a quadratic scaling of the linear density
75: correlation function \citep{pen-etal00}.
76:
77: While for the bright red galaxies which are not flattened by rotation,
78: the intrinsic alignments refer to the correlations between the major principal
79: axes of the galaxy's elliptical shapes which are determined in observations
80: in terms of the anisotropy in their stellar distribution.
81: It has yet to be fully understood what the origin of the anisotropic steller
82: distribution of the red galaxies is and how it is related to the shapes of
83: the host halos. But the standard model based on the cosmic web theory
84: suggests that it may be due to the anisotropic accretion and infall of
85: materials and gas into the host halo along the halo's major principal axes
86: which are in turn elongated with the large scale filamentary matter
87: distribution \citep{wes94,bon-etal96}. Given this anisotropic infall scenario,
88: the red galaxies may have built-in memory of the large-scale filamentary
89: structures and thus their ellipticities might be correlated on larger scales
90: than the spin axes of the blue galaxies.
91:
92: Even for the blue galaxies, it was claimed that the growth of the
93: non-Gaussianity in the density field would cause large-scale correlations
94: of their spin axes \citep{hui-zha02}. To account for the large-scale
95: intrinsic correlations between the neighbor galaxies, we use the following
96: formula:
97: \begin{equation}
98: \label{eqn:3d}
99: \eta_{3D}(r) \approx \frac{1}{6}a^2_{\rm l}\frac{\xi^{2}(r;R)}{\xi^{2}(0;R)}
100: + \varepsilon_{\rm nl}\frac{\xi(r;R)}{\xi(0;R)},
101: \end{equation}
102: where $r$ is the three dimensional separation distance of a galaxy pair
103: and $\xi(r;R)$ is the two-point correlation function of the linear density
104: field smoothed on the Lagrangian galactic scale $R$.
105: Here, the two correlation parameters $a_{\rm l}$ and $\varepsilon_{\rm nl}$
106: represent the strength of the small-scale and the large-scale correlation,
107: respectively. If $\varepsilon_{\rm nl}=0$ and $a_{\rm l}> 0$, the galaxy
108: intrinsic correlation will behave as a quadratic scaling of the density
109: correlation function so that $\eta_{3D}(r)$ should rapidly diminishes
110: to zero as $r$ increases, as the linear tidal torque theory predicts.
111: In contrast, if $\varepsilon_{\rm nl} > 0$ and $a_{\rm l}=0$, the galaxy's
112: intrinsic correlation will follow a linear scaling of $\xi(r)$ so that
113: $\eta_{3D}(r)$ should be non-negligible even at large distance.
114:
115: In fact, we have suggested this formula (eq.[\ref{eqn:3d}]) in our previous
116: work \citep{lee-pen07} to account for the non-Gaussianity effect on the
117: galaxy's spin-spin correlations which are tidally induced.
118: Here we use the same analytic model to describe the intrinsic
119: ellipticity-ellipticity correlations of the galaxies, assuming that since
120: the anisotropic infall of materials that resulted in the ellipticities of
121: the galaxies are also nonlinear manifestation of the tidal field and thus
122: can be approached with the same analytic techniques.
123: Throughout this Letter, the galaxy intrinsic alignments refer to the
124: intrinsic ellipticity-ellipticity alignments of the galaxies, unless
125: otherwise stated.
126:
127: In practice, what can be measured is the intrinsic alignments not of the
128: galaxy's three dimensional shapes but of its two dimensional shapes projected
129: onto the plane of the sky. According to \citet{lee-pen01}, if the two
130: dimensional projection effect is taken in to account properly, the
131: correlation parameter has to be multiplied by a factor of $5/4$. Thus, the
132: two dimensional projected intrinsic correlation function is modified
133: from equation (\ref{eqn:3d}) simply as
134: \begin{equation}
135: \label{eqn:2d}
136: \eta_{2D}(r) \approx
137: \frac{25}{96}a^2_{\rm l}\frac{\xi^{2}(r;R)}{\xi^{2}(0;R)} +
138: \frac{5}{4}\varepsilon_{\rm nl}\frac{\xi(r;R)}{\xi(0;R)}.
139: \end{equation}
140: Note here that although $\eta_{2D}(r)$ represents the intrinsic correlations
141: of the galaxy's two dimensional projected ellipticities, the distance $r$
142: represents the three dimensional separation. It is also worth mentioning
143: here that for the blue galaxies the intrinsic correlations of the galaxy's
144: two dimensional projected ellipticities are in fact same as that of the
145: galaxy's two dimensional projected spin axes since the spin axes are
146: believed to be orthogonal to the galaxy's major axes.
147:
148: To measure $\eta_{2D}(r)$ from the real universe, we use a dataset of galaxies
149: at redshift $0\le z \le 0.4$ downloaded from the SDSS DR6 website
150: (http://www.sdss.org/dr6/). A total of $640647$ galaxies are found to be in
151: this redshift range. For each galaxy, we obtain information on right ascension
152: ($\alpha$), declination ($\delta$), redshift ($z$), position angle ($p$),
153: major-to-minor axis ratios ($b/a$), the $u-g$ and $g-r$ colors, and $r$-band
154: model magnitude ($M_{r}$). Among $640647$ galaxies, the information on $p$
155: and $b/a$ are available only for $639727$ galaxies, from which we also select
156: only those galaxies with $b/a\le 0.8$ since for the nearly face-on galaxies
157: with $b/a > 0.8$ the measurements of the direction of their major axes may
158: suffer from large uncertainty. A total of $434849$ galaxies are found to
159: satisfy the criterion of $b/a\le 0.8$.
160:
161: Using the empirical $u-r$ color separator suggested by
162: \citet{str-etal01} for the SDSS data, we classify the galaxies
163: into the red ($u-r>2.22$) and the blue ($u-r\le 2.22$) sample.
164: Then, we select only bright galaxies by applying the absolute magnitude
165: cut of $M_{r}\le -19.2$.
166: Since the SDSS calibration uses the inverse hyperbolic sine magnitudes
167: (asinh) \citep{lup-etal99}, we calculate $M_{r}$ as the asinh magnitudes
168: using the information on the softening parameter given in the SDSS web site.
169: Finally, we end up having two SDSS samples which consist of a total of
170: $87188$ blue and $283972$ red galaxies brighter than this magnitude cut
171: of $M_{r}\le -19.2$.
172:
173: For each galaxy, we determine the direction of the major axis, $\hat{\bf e}$,
174: in the equatorial coordinate system from the given information on $p$,
175: $\alpha$ and $\delta$: Let us consider two galaxies in a given sample
176: whose major axis directions are found as
177: $\hat{\bf e}_{i}$ and $\hat{\bf e}_{j}$. First, we calculate
178: the unit projected separation vector as
179: $\hat{\bf d}\equiv {\bf d}/\vert{\bf d}\vert$ with
180: $\hat{\bf d}\equiv \hat{\bf r}_{i}-\hat{\bf r}_{j}$, where
181: $\hat{\bf r}_{i}$ and $\hat{\bf r}_{j}$ represent the unit position
182: vectors of the $i$-th and the $j$-th galaxy, respectively. The separation
183: vectors projected onto the plane of the sky at the position of the two
184: galaxies are given as $\hat{\bf d}_{i}\equiv \hat{\bf d} -
185: (\hat{\bf d}\cdot\hat{\bf r}_{i})\hat{\bf r}_{i}$ and $\hat{\bf d}_{j}\equiv
186: \hat{\bf d} - (\hat{\bf d}\cdot\hat{\bf r}_{j})\hat{\bf r}_{j}$,
187: respectively. Then, the intrinsic correlations of the two dimensional
188: projected ellipticities between the galaxies with separation of $r$
189: is calculated as
190: \begin{equation}
191: \label{eqn:gam}
192: \eta_{2D}(r) \equiv \sum_{i,j}
193: \cos^{2}\left(\gamma_{i}-\gamma_{j}\right) - \frac{1}{2},
194: \qquad {\rm with} \qquad
195: \gamma_{i}\equiv \tan^{-1}\left[ \frac{(\hat{\bf r}_{i}\times
196: \hat{\bf d}_{i})\cdot\hat{\bf e}_{i}}{\hat{\bf d}_{i}\cdot\hat{\bf e}_{i}}
197: \right].
198: \end{equation}
199: Here, the angle $\gamma_{i}$ represents the direction of $\hat{\bf e}_{i}$
200: projected onto the plane of sky at the position of ${\bf r}_{i}$. Note that
201: for a galaxy pair with small distance, the quantity
202: $\Delta\gamma\equiv \gamma_{i}-\gamma_{j}$ is actually identical to the
203: difference in the position angle $\Delta p$. To determine the three
204: dimensional separation distance, $r$, of a galaxy pair, we assume a flat
205: $\Lambda$-dominated cosmology with matter density $\Omega_{m}=0.25$,
206: vacuum energy density $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.75$ and Hubble constant
207: $H_{0}=100 h$km s$^{-1}$Mpc$^{-1}$ with $h=1$ \citep{bla-etal03}.
208:
209: Then, we measure $\eta_{2D}(r)$ for the selected red and the blue galaxies,
210: separately. Then, we compare the observational results with the analytic model
211: (\ref{eqn:2d}), determining the best-fit values of the two parameters
212: $a_{\rm l}$ and $\varepsilon_{\rm nl}$ with the help of the
213: $\chi^{2}$-minimization. In the fitting procedure, the values of
214: the two parameters are confined to $0\le a_{\rm l}\le 0.6$ and
215: $0\le \varepsilon_{\rm nl}\le 0.1$\citep{lee-pen01,lee-pen07}.
216: The unmarginalized errors in the fitting parameters are calculated by the
217: formula given in \citet{bev-rob96}: The error in the parameter
218: $a_{\rm l}$ is found as
219: $\sigma_{a}=\Delta a_{\rm l}\sqrt{2(\chi^{2}_{1}-2\chi^{2}_{\rm min} +
220: \chi^{2}_{2})}$. Here $\Delta a_{\rm l}$ represents a fitting step-size,
221: $\chi^{2}_{\rm min}$ is the minimum value of $\chi^{2}$,
222: $\chi^{2}_{1} \equiv \chi^{2}(a_{\rm l0}+\Delta a_{\rm l})$
223: and $\chi^{2}_{1} \equiv \chi^{2}(a_{\rm l0}-\Delta a_{\rm l})$.
224: where $a_{\rm l0}$ is defined as
225: $\chi^{2}_{\rm min}\equiv \chi^{2}(a_{\rm l0})$.
226: The unmarginalized error $\sigma_{\varepsilon}$ in the parameter
227: $\varepsilon_{\rm nl}$ is also calculated in a similar manner.
228:
229: For the analytic model (eq.[\ref{eqn:2d}]), we use the $\Lambda$CDM
230: power spectrum given by \citet{bar-etal86}. For the Lagrangian scale $R$ of
231: each galaxy, we first calculate the luminosity $L$ of each galaxy from its
232: absolute r-band magnitude and then convert it to the galaxy mass scale
233: using the relation of $L\sim M^{0.88}$ \citep{val-ost06}. Then, the Lagrangian
234: galactic scale $R$ is found as a top-hat radius that encloses the mean mass
235: $\bar{M}$ averaged over the galaxies of each sample.
236: When we calculate the absolute magnitude of each galaxy, no $K$-correction is
237: considered: If our goal were to investigate how $\eta_{2D}(r)$ changes in
238: narrow absolute magnitude bin, then it would be necessary to determine
239: $M_{r}$ accurately by considering the $K$-correction \citep{wak-etal06}.
240: However, our goal here is rather to measure the average $\eta_{2D}(r)$
241: for those galaxies which are brighter than a single magnitude threshold
242: in the redshift range of $0\le z \le 0.4$. Hence, a maximum $20\%$ error
243: that may be caused by ignoring $K$-correction in the estimation of the
244: galaxy absolute magnitude should not be an issue here.
245:
246: Fig. \ref{fig:cor} plots the observational results of $\eta_{2D}(r)$ from the
247: red and the blue galaxy sample as solid dots in the top and the bottom panel,
248: respectively. In each panel, the solid line represents the analytic model
249: with the best-fit correlation parameters $a_{\rm l}$ and $\epsilon_{\rm nl}$.
250: The errors are calculated as standard deviation for the case of
251: no correlation as $\sigma_{\eta}=1/\sqrt{8n_{\rm p}}$where $n_{\rm p}$ is the
252: number of galaxy pairs belonging to each bin \citep{pen-etal00}. As can be
253: seen, clear signals of ellipticity correlation higher than $3\sigma_{\eta}$
254: are detected from both the red and the blue galaxy samples at the first
255: bin ($r \le 3h^{-1}$Mpc). Note also that from the red galaxy sample the
256: correlation signal is also detected at the second distance bin
257: ($r \le 3h^{-1}$Mpc).
258:
259: Table \ref{tab:cor} lists the best-fit values of $a_{\rm l}$ and
260: $\epsilon_{\rm nl}$. The results show a marked difference between the blue
261: and the red galaxy intrinsic alignments: For the blue galaxies, the best-fit
262: values of the correlation parameters are found to be $a_{\rm l}=0.20\pm 0.04$
263: and $\epsilon_{\rm nl}\approx0.$, which indicates that $\eta_{\rm 2D}$ of the
264: blue galaxies follows a quadratic scaling of $\xi(r)$, as predicted
265: by the linear tidal torque theory \citep{pen-etal00,lee-erd07}.
266: In contrast, for the red galaxies, the best-fit values are
267: $a_{\rm l}\approx 0$ and $\epsilon_{\rm nl}=(2.6\pm 0.5)\times 10^{-3}$,
268: which implies that $\eta_{2D}$ of the bright red galaxies follows a linear
269: scaling of $\xi(r)$. This observational result is consistent with the
270: picture that the ellipticities of the blue and the red galaxies are induced
271: by the initial tidal field and the anisotropic infall of materials,
272: respectively.
273:
274: Before assuring ourselves that the detected signal is real, however, it is
275: necessary to examine the effect of the systematic error in the measurement
276: of the position angles of the SDSS galaxies because the systematic error
277: could cause correlations of galaxy ellipticities that mimic intrinsic
278: alignments. To quantify the systematic error, we perform two simple tests.
279: First, we shuffle randomly the redshifts of the selected SDSS galaxies in
280: each sample and remeasure $\eta_{2D}$ one hundred times.
281: For each distance bin, we calculate the mean averaged over these $100$ random
282: realizations and the standard deviation between realizations, assuming that
283: these $100$ shuffling processes are mutually independent.
284: If the systematic error had a dominant effect, then a correlation signal would
285: not disappear even when the redshifts are shuffled. Fig \ref{fig:cor} plots
286: the mean plus and minus one standard deviation as (green) dashed lines.
287: As can be seen, when the redshifts of the selected galaxies are shuffled,
288: the ellipticity correlations between the galaxies disappear, which suggests
289: that the effect of the systematic error on the galaxy intrinsic alignments
290: be negligible.
291:
292: Second, we measure the ellipticity cross-correlations between the red and
293: the blue galaxies, which is plotted as solid line and compared with the
294: ellipticity correlation of the red (red dotted) and the blue (blue dashed)
295: galaxies in Fig. \ref{fig:cross}. If the systematic error caused the
296: correlation of galaxy ellipticities, then we would find non-negligible
297: cross-correlations of the ellipticities between the red and the blue galaxies.
298: As can be seen in Fig. \ref{fig:cross}, however, the cross-correlations
299: are quite weak at the first distance bin, which reassures us that the
300: detected ellipticity correlations of the red and the blue galaxies are
301: not spurious intrinsic.
302:
303: It is worth discussing the effect of the redshift distortion that we have
304: ignored in our analysis. For the blue galaxies, its mean peculiar velocity
305: dispersion has been observed to be quite small less than $150$ km/s on
306: average \citep{dav-etal97}. Therefore it is well justified to ignore the
307: redshift distortion effect. On the other hand, for the red galaxies
308: which are observed to have higher peculiar velocity dispersion around
309: $200$ km/s \citep{dav-etal03}, the redshift distortion effect may cause
310: non-negligible degree of scatter in the measurement of the galaxy separation
311: distance $r$. Thus, we do not exclude a possibility that the
312: characteristic distance scale for the red galaxy intrinsic alignments
313: and the value of $\varepsilon_{\rm nl}$ could be smaller in real space
314: than observed in redshift space.
315:
316: The key implication of our results for the weak lensing survey is also worth
317: discussing here. According to our results, the degree of the galaxy intrinsic
318: alignments is quite strong for the bright galaxies at redshifts $z\le 0.4$.
319: Since the galaxy intrinsic correlations tend to decrease with redshift
320: \citep{lee-pen07}, this implies that at $z=1$ relevant for the cosmic shear
321: survey the intrinsic correlations may be larger than the detected signal of
322: $a_{\rm l}=0.2$ and thus should not be completely negligible.
323: Our results also suggest that when removing close galaxy pairs as intrinsic
324: ellipticity contaminants from the cosmic shear analysis
325: \citep{hey-hea03,tak-whi04}, a typical distance scale of a galaxy
326: pair has to be determined with care, since the scaling of the intrinsic
327: correlations depend on the intrinsic property of the galaxies (red or blue).
328:
329: We conclude that our first detection of a clear signal of the galaxy
330: intrinsic correlations from the SDSS data will be useful for the weak
331: lensing measurement as well as for understanding the evolution and formation
332: of the red and the blue galaxies.
333:
334: \acknowledgments
335:
336: We thank an anonymous referee for his/her constructive report which helped
337: us improve significantly the original manuscript. We also thank B. M\'enard
338: for his help in downloading the SDSS data and R. Mandelbaum for useful
339: comments.J.L. is grateful to the warm hospitality of the Canadian Institute
340: for Theoretical Astrophysics (CITA) where this project was planned and
341: carried out. J.L. acknowledges the financial support from the Korea
342: Science and Engineering Foundation (KOSEF) grant funded by the Korean
343: Government (MOST, NO. R01-2007-000-10246-0).
344:
345: Funding for the SDSS and SDSS-II has been provided by the Alfred
346: P. Sloan Foundation, the Participating Institutions, the National
347: Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy, the National
348: Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Japanese Monbukagakusho, the
349: Max Planck Society, and the Higher Education Funding Council for
350: England. The SDSS Web Site is http://www.sdss.org/.
351:
352: The SDSS is managed by the Astrophysical Research Consortium for the
353: Participating Institutions. The Participating Institutions are the
354: American Museum of Natural History, Astrophysical Institute Potsdam,
355: University of Basel, University of Cambridge, Case Western Reserve
356: University, University of Chicago, Drexel University, Fermilab, the
357: Institute for Advanced Study, the Japan Participation Group, Johns
358: Hopkins University, the Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics, the
359: Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, the Korean
360: Scientist Group, the Chinese Academy of Sciences (LAMOST), Los Alamos
361: National Laboratory, the Max-Planck-Institute for Astronomy (MPIA),
362: the Max-Planck-Institute for Astrophysics (MPA), New Mexico State
363: University, Ohio State University, University of Pittsburgh,
364: University of Portsmouth, Princeton University, the United States
365: Naval Observatory, and the University of Washington.
366:
367:
368: \begin{thebibliography}{}
369: \bibitem[Bardeen et al.(1986)]{bar-etal86}
370: Bardeen, J. M., Bond, J. R., Kaiser, N., \& Szalay, A. S. 1986, \apj, 304, 15
371: \bibitem[Bevington \& Robinson(1996)]{bev-rob96}
372: Bevington, P. R., \& Robinson, D. K. 1996, Data Reduction and Error
373: Analysis for the Physical Sciences (Boston : McGraw-Hill)
374: \bibitem[Blanton et al.(2003)]{bla-etal03}
375: Blanton, M. R., et al. 2003, \apj, 592, 819
376: \bibitem[Bond, Kofman, \& Pogosyan(1996)]{bon-etal96}
377: Bond, J., R., Kofman, L., \& Pogosyan, D. 1996, Nature, 380, 603
378: \bibitem[Brown et al.(2002)]{bro-etal02}
379: Brown, M. L., Taylor, A. N., Hambly, N. C., \& Dye, S. 2002, \mnras, 333, 501
380: \bibitem[Catelan et al. (2001)]{cat-etal01}
381: Catelan, P., Kamionkowski, M., \& Blandford, R. D. 2001, \mnras, 320, L7
382: \bibitem[Davis et al.(1997)]{dav-etal97}
383: Davis, M., Miller, A., \& White, S.D.M. 1997, \apj, 490, 63
384: \bibitem[Davis et al.(2003)]{dav-etal03}
385: Davis, A. N., Dragan, H., \& Krauss, L. M. 2003, \mnras, 344, 1029
386: \bibitem[Doroshkevich(1970)]{dor70}
387: Doroshkevich, A. G. 1970, Astrofizika, 6, 581
388: \bibitem[Heymans \& Heavens(2003)]{hey-hea03}
389: Heymans, C. \& Heavens, A. 2003, \mnras, 339, 711
390: \bibitem[Heymans et al.(2004)]{hey-etal04}
391: Heymans, C., Brown, M., Heavens, A., Meisenheimer, K., Taylor, A., \&
392: Wolf, C. 2004, \mnras, 361, 160
393: \bibitem[Hirata \& Seljak(2004)]{hir-sel04}
394: Hirata, C. M. \& Seljak, U. 2004, \prd, 70, 063526
395: \bibitem[Hirata et al.(2004)]{hir-etal04}
396: Hirata, C. M., et al. 2004, \mnras, 353, 529
397: \bibitem[Hirata et al.(2007)]{hir-etal07}
398: Hirata, C. M., et al. 2007, preprint [astro-ph/0701671]
399: \bibitem[Hui \& Zhang(2002)]{hui-zha02}
400: Hui, L. \& Zhang Z. 2002, preprint [astro-ph/0205512]
401: \bibitem[Jing(2002)]{jin02}
402: Jing, Y. 2002, \mnras, 335, 89
403: \bibitem[Lee \& Pen(2001)]{lee-pen01}
404: Lee, J. \& Pen, U. L. 2001, \apj, 555, 106
405: \bibitem[Lee \& Pen(2002)]{lee-pen02}
406: Lee, J. \& Pen, U. L. 2002, \apj, 567, 111
407: \bibitem[Lee \& Erdogdu(2007)]{lee-erd07}
408: Lee, J. \& Erdogdu, P. 2007, preprint [arXiv:0707.1611]
409: \bibitem[Lee \& Pen(2007)]{lee-pen07}
410: Lee, J. \& Pen, U. L. 2007, preprint [arXiv:0707.1690]
411: \bibitem[Lee et al.(2007)]{lee-etal07}
412: Lee, J. Springel, V., Pen, U. L., Lemson, G. 2007, preprint [arXiv:0709.1106]
413: \bibitem[Lupton et al.(1999)]{lup-etal99}
414: Lupton, R. H., Gunn, J. E., \& Szalay, A. S. 1999, \apj, 118, 1406
415: \bibitem[Mandelbaum et al.(2006)]{man-etal06}
416: Mandelbaum, R., Hirata, C. M., Ishak, M., Seljak, U., \& Brinkmann, J.
417: 2006, \mnras, 367, 611
418: \bibitem[Pen et al.(2000)]{pen-etal00}
419: Pen, U. L., Lee, J., \& Seljak, U. 2000, 543, L107
420: \bibitem[Strateva et al.(2001)]{str-etal01}
421: Strateva, I., et al. 2001, \apj, 122, 1861
422: \bibitem[Takada \& White(2004)]{tak-whi04}
423: Takada, M., \& White, S. D. M. 2004, \apj, 601, L1
424: \bibitem[Vale \& Ostriker(2006)]{val-ost06}
425: Vale, A., Ostriker, J. P. 2006, \mnras, 371, 1173
426: \bibitem[York et al.(2000)]{yor-etal00}
427: York, D. G., et al. 2000, \mnras, 372, 537
428: \bibitem[Wake et al.(2006)]{wak-etal06}
429: Wake, D. A., et al. 2006, \mnras, 372, 537
430: \bibitem[West(1994)]{wes94}
431: West, M. J. 1994, \mnras, 268, 79
432: \bibitem[White(1984)]{whi84}
433: White, S. D. M. 1984, \apj, 286, 38
434:
435: \end{thebibliography}
436:
437:
438: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
439: \clearpage
440: \begin{deluxetable}{cccccc}
441: \tablewidth{0pt}
442: \setlength{\tabcolsep}{5mm}
443: \tablehead{
444: Color & $z$ & $N_{g}$ & $M_{r}$ & $a_{\rm l}\times 10^{1}$ &
445: $\varepsilon_{\rm nl}\times 10^{3}$ \\
446: &&&(no $K$-correlation)&&}
447: \tablecaption{The redshift range ($z$), a total number of galaxies
448: ($N_{g}$), the range of the absolute magnitude ($M_{r}$), the
449: best-fit-values of the linear and the nonlinear correlation parameters.}
450: \startdata
451: Red & $[0.0,0.4]$ & $283972$ & $\le -19.2$ & $0.0\pm 3.1$ & $2.6\pm 0.5$ \\
452: Blue & $[0.0,0.4]$ & $87188$ & $\le -19.2$ & $2.0\pm 0.4$ & $0.0\pm 1.6$ \\
453: \enddata
454: \label{tab:cor}
455: \end{deluxetable}
456: %\end{tabular}
457: %\end{table}
458: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
459:
460:
461: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
462: \clearpage
463: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
464: \begin{figure}
465: \begin{center}
466: \plotone{f1.eps}
467: \caption{Correlations of the two dimensional projected ellipticities from
468: the SDSS red and the blue galaxies (top and bottom, respectively) with the
469: absolute magnitude cut of $M_{r}\le -19.2$ in the redshift range of
470: $0\le z\le 0.4$. In each panel, the solid dots represent the observed
471: signals, while the solid line corresponds to the analytic model with the
472: best-fit parameters (eq.[\ref{eqn:2d}]) found through
473: $\chi^{2}$-minimization. The dashed line corresponds to the correlation
474: from the data with $z$-shuffled. For the observed signals, only those
475: galaxies with major-to-minor axis ratio of $b/a\le 0.8$ are considered.}
476: \label{fig:cor}
477: \end{center}
478: \end{figure}
479: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
480: \clearpage
481: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
482: \begin{figure}
483: \begin{center}
484: \plotone{f2.eps}
485: \caption{Cross-correlations of the two dimensional projected ellipticities
486: between the SDSS red and the blue galaxies (solid).}
487: \label{fig:cross}
488: \end{center}
489: \end{figure}
490:
491: \end{document}
492: