1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
3: \begin{document}
4: \title{The Variation of Galaxy Morphological Type with the Shear of
5: Environment}
6: \author{Jounghun Lee and Bomee Lee}
7: \affil{Department of Physics and Astronomy, FPRD, Seoul National University,
8: Seoul 151-747, Korea}
9: \email{jounghun@astro.snu.ac.kr, bmlee@astro.snu.ac.kr}
10: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
11: \begin{abstract}
12: Recent N-body simulations have shown that the assembly history of galactic
13: halos depend on the density of large-scale environment. It implies that the
14: galaxy properties like age and size of bulge may also vary with the
15: surrounding large-scale structures, which are characterized by the tidal shear
16: as well as the density. By using a sample of $15,882$ well-resolved nearby
17: galaxies from the Tully Catalog and the real space tidal field reconstructed
18: from the 2Mass Redshift Survey (2MRS), we investigate the dependence of galaxy
19: morphological type on the shear of large-scale environment where the galaxies
20: are embedded. We first calculate the large scale dimensionless overdensities
21: ($\delta$) and the large-scale ellipticities ($e$) of the regions where the
22: Tully galaxies are located and classify the Tully galaxies according to their
23: morphological types and create subsamples selected at similar value of
24: $\delta$ but span different ranges in $e$.
25: We calculate the mean ellipticity, $\langle e\rangle$, averaged over each
26: subsample and find a signal of variation of $\langle e\rangle$ with galaxy
27: morphological type: For the case of $0.5\le\delta\le1.0$, the ellipticals are
28: found to be preferentially located in the regions with low ellipticity.
29: For the case of $-0.3\le\delta\le 0.1$, the latest-type spirals are found
30: to be preferentially located in the regions with high ellipticity.
31: The null hypothesis that the mean ellipticities of the regions where the
32: ellipticals and the latest type spirals are located are same as the global
33: mean ellipticity averaged over all types is rejected at $3\sigma$ level
34: when $-0.3\le\delta\le 0.1$. Yet, no signal of galaxy-shear correlation is
35: found in the highly overdense/underdense regions. The observed trend suggests
36: that the formation epochs of galactic halos might be a function not only of
37: halo mass and large-scale density but also of large-scale shear.
38: Since the statistical significance of the overall trend is low, it will
39: require a sample of at least $100,000$ galaxies to verify the existence of
40: this correlation.
41: \end{abstract}
42: \keywords{cosmology:theory --- galaxies: observation}
43: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
44: \section{INTRODUCTION}
45:
46: It has been known for long that the physical properties of galaxies such as
47: morphological type, color, luminosity, spin parameter, star formation rate,
48: concentration parameter and so on are functions of their environments
49: \citep{dre80,pos-gel84,whi-etal93,lew-etal02,gom-etal03,got-etal03,roj-etal05,
50: kue-ryd05,bla-etal05,ber-etal06,cho-etal07,par-etal07}.
51: Most previous works have largely focused on the galaxies located in the highly
52: dense regions and usually quantified the environmental dependence of galaxy
53: properties in terms of cross-correlations with local density on small scale,
54: which is believed to be established by environment-dependent processes like
55: galaxy-galaxy interaction.
56:
57: The currently popular $\Lambda$CDM model predicts that the galaxy properties
58: are correlated with not only the small scale but also the large-scale
59: environment. Here the small scale and the large-scale environments represent
60: the surrounding regions smaller and larger than $5h^{-1}$Mpc, respectively.
61: Recent high-resolution N-body simulations of a $\Lambda$CDM cosmology have
62: demonstrated that the assembly history of galactic halos of a given mass
63: change with the density field smoothed on sufficiently large scale
64: \citep{gao-etal05}. Since the galaxy content depend strongly on assembly
65: history of its host halo \citep{spr-etal05,cro-etal07}, this numerical
66: finding suggests that the intrinsic properties of galaxies may be correlated
67: with the density of large-scale environments.
68:
69: In fact, several groups have already found observational evidences for the
70: existence of cross-correlations between galaxy properties and large-scale
71: tidal shear. \citet{nav-etal04} found that the spin axes of spiral galaxies
72: near the Local Supercluster lie preferentially on the Supergalactic Plane.
73: \citet{tru-etal06} also showed by analyzing recent observational data from
74: large galaxy surveys that the spin axes of void galaxies tend to be inclined
75: to the void surfaces, keeping the initial memory of tidally induce alignments.
76: \citet{pan-bha06} have shown that the galaxy luminosity and colour are
77: dependent on the filamentarity of large-scale environment. More recently,
78: \citet{pan-bha08} have also presented that the star formation rate of galaxies
79: are cross-correlated with the filamentarity of the surrounding large-scale
80: structures. \citet{her-etal07} found a one-to-one correspondence between
81: the value of the galaxy spin parameter and the morphological type, while
82: \citet{her-cer06} and \citet{cer-her08} have noted that the spin parameter
83: of the observed galaxies is strongly correlated with their color and
84: chemical abundance.
85:
86: The existence of cross-correlations between galaxy properties and density of
87: large-scale environment implies that the galaxy content still have the memory
88: of the initial conditions of the Lagrangian regions where the host halos
89: formed. In the scenario of the biased galaxy formation,
90: the galaxy sites correspond to the high peaks of the linear density field
91: \citep{kai84,bar-etal86}. But, since the initial density peaks are not
92: spherical, they should be characterized not only by the peak heights
93: but also by their ellipticity and prolateness. Hence, if the galaxy
94: properties are still linked to the large-scale density, then it is likely
95: that they are also linked to the large-scale ellipticity and prolaticity.
96:
97: Our goal here is to test this statistical link. Instead of the ellipticity
98: of the large-scale density field, however, we consider the ellipticity of
99: the large-scale potential field (i.e., the tidal shear). Since the potential
100: field is smoother than the density field, we believe that the large-scale
101: potential field reflects more directly the linear conditions.
102: Furthermore, the tidal shear field, defined as the second derivative of the
103: potential field, has a large-scale coherence, resulting in highly anisotropic
104: spatial distribution of galaxies at present epoch \citep{bon-etal96}.
105: Therefore, the tidal shear field is more readily measurable from the
106: large-scale spatial distribution of present galaxies.
107:
108: In previous approaches, however, the correlation between galaxy properties
109: and the shear of large-scale structure was measured in redshift space.
110: Since the redshift distortion effect could contaminate the measurements of
111: the filamentarity of the large scale structure, it will be desirable to
112: measure it in real space. Moreover, true as it is that in the linear regime
113: the density and the tidal shear at a given region are mutually independent,
114: it is likely that the two quantities have developed cross-correlations in the
115: subsequent non-linear regime. Therefore, to find an independent relationship
116: between galaxy properties and large-scale tidal shear, one has to first
117: account for the density-shear correlations and remove its effect.
118:
119: We attempt here to measure observationally an independent relationship
120: between the morphological types of nearby large galaxies and the real-space
121: tidal shear reconstructed from all sky survey. The organization of this paper
122: is as follows: In \S 2, the observational data are described.
123: In \S 3, the shear of environment is defined and its mean value averaged over
124: each galaxy subsample at similar density is measured as a function of galaxy
125: morphological type. In \S 4, the results are discussed and a final conclusion
126: is drawn.
127:
128: \section{OBSERVATIONAL DATA: AN OVERVIEW}
129:
130: A total of $35,000$ galaxies with spectroscopic information are listed in the
131: Tully Catalog, which was constructed from the ESO/Uppsala full-sky survey
132: \citep{nil74,lau82}. Only $15,922$ galaxies in the Tully catalog have
133: detailed information on their morphological types, which were determined
134: by B. Tully according to the conventional Hubble classification scheme.
135: For a detailed description of the Hubble classification scheme, see Table 2
136: in the Third References Catalog of Bright Galaxies \citep[RC3][]{dev-etal91}.
137: As for the rest $19,078$ galaxies in the Tully catalog, the stages of their
138: morphological types are described as either "irregulars" or "uncertain" or
139: "doubtful" or "spindle", "outer ring" or "pseudo-outer R", or "irregulars".
140: These are thus excluded from our analysis.
141:
142: According to the morphological type described in RC3, we divide the selected
143: Tully galaxies into six samples: E, L, SI, SII, SIII, and SIV.
144: Table \ref{tab:type} lists the class, the morphological type (as in RC3),
145: and the number of the galaxies ($N_{g}$) belonging to the six samples:
146: The sample "E" contains only ellipticals with the Hubble type of cE,E0, E0-1,
147: E+; The sample $L$ contains only lenticulars with the Hubble type of
148: $S0^{-1}$,$S0^{O}$,$S0^{+}$; The sample $SI$ consists of the spirals of types
149: $S0/a$ and $Sa$ which have tightly wound arms and a largest bulge.
150: While the spirals of types $Scd$, $Sd$, $Sdm$ and $Sm$ belong to the sample
151: $SIV$, which have no well developed bulge and loosely wound arms.
152: The sample $SII$ contains the spirals of type $Sa$ as well as the spirals
153: of type $Sab$ that are intermediate between $Sa$ and $Sb$.
154: Likewise, the sample $SIII$ contains the spirals type of $Sb$ and
155: the spirals of type $Sbc$. As can be noted, the size of bulge and the
156: tightness of the spiral arms decrease from $SI$ to $SIV$.
157:
158: The real space density field was originally reconstructed on $64^{3}$ grids
159: in a box of linear size $400h^{-1}$Mpc from the 2Mass Redshift Survey
160: \citep[][2MRS]{erd-etal06}. Basically, it is the linear density field
161: smoothed with a wiener filter assuming a linear bias. \citet{lee-erd07} used
162: the 2MRS density field to reconstruct the tidal shear field on the same
163: $64^{3}$ grids. As described in detail in \citet{erd-etal06}, the real space
164: positions were recovered by applying the Wiener reconstruction algorithm to
165: the 2MRS data. This algorithm basically deconvolve the linear redshift
166: distortions in the radial direction using a distortion matrix.
167: For a detailed description of the method used to recover the real-space
168: position, see \citet{erd-etal06}.
169:
170: The reconstructed tidal shear field consists of a set of three eigenvalues,
171: $\{\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2},\lambda_{3}\}$, of the tidal shear tensor assigned
172: to each grid. Figure \ref{fig:pro} plots the probability density distributions
173: of the three eigenvalues of the 2MRS tidal field, assuming
174: $\lambda_{1}\ge\lambda_{2}\ge\lambda_{3}$. As can be seen, the distribution
175: of the second largest eigenvalue, $p(\lambda_{2})$, is almost symmetric around
176: the peak at zero with narrow width, while the other two distributions
177: $p(\lambda_{1})$ and $p(\lambda_{3})$ are asymmetric around zero with
178: broader shapes.
179:
180: The differences among the eigenvalues are related to the shear of environment
181: at a given grid. If $\lambda_{1}=\lambda_{2}=\lambda_{3}$, it means that the
182: shear of environment is zero. The larger the mutual differences among the
183: eigenvalues are, the higher the shear of environment is. Figure \ref{fig:ait}
184: plots the 2MRS tidal shear eigenvalue field evaluated on a thin shell at
185: $80h^{-1}$Mpc shown in Supergalactic Aitoff projection. The top, middle
186: and bottom panel shows the $\lambda_{1}$, $\lambda_{2}$ and $\lambda_{3}$
187: field, respectively. In each panel, the darker regions correspond to
188: the low eigenvalues while the bright regions to the high eigenvalues.
189:
190: By applying the cloud-in-cell (CIC) interpolation method \citep{hoc-eas88} to
191: the 2MRS tidal shear field, \citet{lee-erd07} also calculated the tidal
192: tensors and their eigenvalues at the positions of the selected $15,922$
193: Tully galaxies. Using the reconstructed 2MRS tidal shear field, we measure
194: the values of the shear at the positions of the Tully galaxies. In \S 3,
195: we will see how this measured shears are related to the morphological types
196: of the Tully galaxies.
197:
198: \section{Galaxy-Shear Correlations}
199:
200: \subsection{\it Variation with the LSS Type}
201:
202: Let us consider a position, ${\bf x}$, where a selected Tully galaxy is
203: located. It depends on the signs of $\lambda_{1},\ \lambda_{2},\ \lambda_{3}$
204: at ${\bf x}$, whether the selected galaxy belongs to a void or a sheet or
205: a filament or a halo. If all three eigenvalues are positive at ${\bf x}$,
206: then the given galaxy is located in a halo-like region; If $\lambda_{2}>0$,
207: $\lambda_{3}<0$, then it is in a filament-like region; If $\lambda_{1}>0$,
208: $\lambda_{2}<0$, then it is in a sheet-like region; If $\lambda_{1}<0$,
209: then it is in a void-like region.
210:
211: We investigate the dependence of the relative abundance of the sample galaxies
212: located in halo-like regions on the morphological type, by measuring the
213: conditional number density (CND):
214: \begin{equation}
215: \frac{\delta N_{\rm type}}{\delta N_{\rm all}}
216: \equiv \frac{\Delta N_{\rm type}}{N_{\rm type}}\times
217: \frac{N_{\rm all}}{\Delta N_{\rm all}}.
218: \end{equation}
219: Here, $N_{\rm type}$ is the number of the galaxies belonging to a given
220: sample, $\Delta N_{\rm type}$ is the number of those galaxies in the sample
221: which are located in halo-like regions, $N_{\rm all}$ is the number of
222: all selected Tully galaxies and $\Delta N_{\rm all}$ is the number of those
223: Tully galaxies which are located in halo-like regions. If CND $>1$, then
224: the galaxies in a given sample have stronger tendency to be located in
225: halo-like regions than the parent sample.
226:
227: The CND of the galaxies located in void-like, sheet-like, filament-like
228: regions are also calculated in a similar manner. Figure \ref{fig:con} plots
229: the CNDs as histograms for the six samples with Poisson errors.
230: As can be seen, the six histograms show all distinct behaviors:
231: The CND of the sample E is highest in halo-like regions and lowest in
232: void-like regions; The CND of the sample L is lowest in sheet-like regions;
233: The CND of the sample SI is highest in filament-like regions;
234: The CND of the sample SII is almost uniform; The CND of the sample SIII is
235: highest in void-like and sheet-like regions; The CND of the sample SIV is
236: highest in void-like regions. It is interesting to see that in void-like
237: regions the CND of the lenticulars have relatively high value compared with
238: that of the ellipticals.
239:
240: Although the result shown in Fig. \ref{fig:con} shows clearly that the galaxy
241: morphology is correlated with the shear of the surrounding large-scale
242: structure, it should not be directly translated into an observational evidence
243: for the existence of an {\it independent} relationship between galaxy
244: morphology and large-scale shear.
245: Since the signs of the three eigenvalues of the tidal shears are correlated
246: with the local density, the observed signals shown in Fig. \ref{fig:con}
247: could be resulted from the well known correlations between the local density
248: and the galaxy morphology. For instance, the observed tendency that the
249: ellipticals are more abundant in the halo-like regions may be due to the
250: fact that the local density is usually higher in the halo-like regions
251: since the three eigenvalues are all positive and the ellipticals are
252: preferentially located in the high-density regions. Therefore, to detect the
253: true relationship between galaxy morphology and the shear of large-scale
254: structure, one has to use controlled subsamples where the correlations between
255: galaxy morphology and density are removed. In the following subsection, we
256: pursue this task.
257:
258: \subsection{\it Variation with the Ellipticity}
259:
260: The shear of environment at a given galaxy position ${\bf x}$ is caused by the
261: anisotropy in the distribution of the surrounding large scale structure which
262: in turn induces asphericity in the gravitational potential $\Phi ({\bf x})$.
263: The asphericity of $\Phi ({\bf x})$ can be quantified in terms of ellipticity,
264: $e$, defined as \citep{bar-etal86}
265: \begin{equation}
266: e\equiv\frac{\lambda_{1}-\lambda_{3}}{2\vert\delta\vert}.
267: \label{eqn:ep}
268: \end{equation}
269: Here the sum of the three eigenvalues of the tidal shear equals the
270: dimensionless overdensity, $\delta \equiv (\rho - \bar{\rho})/\bar{\rho}$
271: where $\bar{\rho}$ is the background density:
272: $\delta=\sum_{i=1}^{3}\lambda_{i}$.
273: If the three eigenvalues, $\lambda_{1},\ \lambda_{2},\ \lambda_{3}$, at
274: ${\bf x}$ have the same value, the iso-potential surface at ${\bf x}$ has
275: a spherical shape with $e=0$. The larger the differences between
276: $\lambda_{1}$ and $\lambda_{3}$ are, the higher the value of $e$ is.
277: If the spatial distribution of galaxies located in a region is highly
278: anisotropic, then the value of $e$ of the region will be high. In other
279: words, the region has a high ellipticity. The higher the degree of the
280: anisotropy in the spatial distribution of the galaxies in a region increase,
281: the higher value of the ellipticity the region has.
282:
283: At the position of each Tully galaxy, we determine the values of $\delta$
284: and $e$. We first calculate the means of $\Delta\delta\equiv\delta
285: -\bar{\delta}_{G}$ averaged separately over each sample listed in Table
286: \ref{tab:type}, where $\bar{\delta}_{G}$ is the global mean value of the
287: dimensionless overdensity averaged over all selected Tully galaxies.
288: If $\Delta\delta >0$, there is a tendency of the sample galaxies to be
289: located in high-density regions. If $\Delta\delta <0$, the sample galaxies
290: tend to be located in low-density regions.
291: If $\Delta\delta =0$ for all six samples, there is no correlation
292: between galaxy morphology and large-scale density.
293: Figure \ref{fig:den} plots $\langle\Delta\delta\rangle$ of the six samples.
294: As can be seen, there is indeed a strong dependence of galaxy-morphology
295: on the large-scale density, which is consistent with numerical results
296: \citep{gao-etal05}.
297:
298: Now, we calculate the means of $\Delta e\equiv e-\bar{e}_{G}$ averaged
299: separately over each sample, under the constraint that the value of $\delta$
300: is fixed in some narrow range to remove the effect of morphology-density
301: correlations. Note that $\bar{e}_{G}$ is averaged in the same constrained
302: range of $\delta$. If $\Delta e >0$, there is a {\it independent} tendency
303: of the sample galaxies to be located in the high-shear regions.
304: If $\Delta e <0$, the sample galaxies tend to be located in the low-shear
305: regions. If $\Delta e=0$ for all six samples, there is no correlation between
306: galaxy morphology and large-scale shear.
307:
308: In Fig. \ref{fig:ell1} we plot $\langle\Delta e\rangle$ of the six samples in
309: the top panel for the case where the value of $\delta$ is fixed in the range
310: of $[-0.3,-0.1]$. The errors, $\sigma$, are calculated as one standard
311: deviation in the measurement of the mean value:
312: $\sigma\equiv\sqrt{[\langle(\Delta e)^{2}\rangle-\langle\Delta e\rangle^{2}]
313: /(N_{g}-1)}$ where $N_{g}$ is the number of the sample galaxies selected
314: at the given density range. To demonstrate that the correlation between
315: morphology and density is effectively removed by constraining the value of
316: $\delta$ to this narrow range of $[-0.3,-0.1]$, we also plot
317: $\langle\Delta\delta\rangle$ of the six samples in the bottom panel.
318: As can be seen, the value of $\langle\Delta\delta\rangle$, is almost uniform
319: over the six subsamples, indicating that the morphology-density correlations
320: are controlled to a negligible level with this constraint of
321: $-0.3\le\delta\le-0.1$. We detect a $2.9\sigma$ signal that the mean
322: ellipticity of the sample $SIV$ deviates from the global mean ellipticity.
323: This result suggests that the latest-type spirals tend to be located in the
324: regions of high-ellipticity.
325:
326: Fig. \ref{fig:ell2} plots the same as Fig. \ref{fig:ell1} but with a different
327: constraint of $0.05\le\delta\le 0.1$. A $3\sigma$ signal of morphology-shear
328: correlation is also detected for the sample $SIV$ galaxies. It is consistent
329: with the previous result that the latest-type spirals tend to be
330: preferentially located in the high-shear environment.
331: Fig. \ref{fig:ell3} plots the same as Fig. \ref{fig:ell1} but with $\delta$
332: in the range of $[0.2,0.4]$. We detect a $2.2\sigma$ signal that the
333: mean ellipticity of the regions where the galaxies of the sample $E$ are
334: located is lower than the global mean ellipticity, and a $2.4\sigma$ signal
335: that the mean ellipticity of the regions where the galaxies of the sample
336: $SIV$ is located is higher than the global mean ellipticity.
337: Fig. \ref{fig:ell4} plots the same as Fig. \ref{fig:ell1} but with $\delta$
338: in the range of $[0.5,1.06]$. There are detected a $3.1\sigma$ signal that the
339: mean ellipticity of the regions where the sample $E$ galaxies are located
340: is lower than the global mean ellipticity, and a $2\sigma$ signal of
341: correlation between latest type spirals (SIV) and high-shear region.
342: The results shown in Figs. \ref{fig:ell3} and \ref{fig:ell4} indicate
343: consistently that the ellipticals tend to be preferentially located in the
344: low-shear environment while the latest-type spirals tend to be preferentially
345: located in the high-shear environment.
346:
347: Nevertheless, it has to be noted that the galaxy-shear correlation signal
348: is found to be statistically significant only in bins containing E and SIV
349: galaxies. Therefore, when the results over all six bins are considered
350: the null hypothesis of no galaxy-shear correlation is still quite acceptable.
351: In the given density range, the null hypothesis is found to be rejected at
352: only the $\sim 10\%$ confidence level when the results over all six bins are
353: considered. Since we consider only those galaxies at similar densities,
354: the sample size, $N_{g}$, is quite small, resulting in large statistical
355: errors. It is also worth mentioning that neither in the highly underdense
356: region with $\delta <-0.5$ nor in the highly overdense region with
357: $\delta >1.0$, no signal of galaxy-shear correlation is found since
358: the degree of density-shear correlations is too high to be removed in
359: these regions.
360:
361: \section{DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION}
362:
363: By measuring observationally the mean ellipticities of large-scale structures
364: where the nearby galaxies are embedded as a function of galaxy morphological
365: types, we have tentatively detected an independent relationship between galaxy
366: morphology and shear of environment: In the mildly overdense environment with
367: large scale dimensionless overdensity of $0.05\le\delta\le1.06$, the
368: ellipticals are found to prefer the low-shear region;
369: In the mildly underdense environment with large scale density of
370: $-0.3\le\delta\le-0.1$, the latest-type spirals (Scd-Sm) are found to prefer
371: the high-shear region. No correlation signal, however, is found either in the
372: highly overdense ($\delta> 1$) or in the highly underdense environment
373: ($\delta<-0.5$).
374:
375: This observational results may be explained by the dependence of halo
376: formation epochs on the shear of large-scale environment. It has been known
377: that the formation epochs of galactic halos depend not only on their mass but
378: also on the density of large-scale environment \citep{gao-etal05}.
379: Here we argue that there is some observational evidence to support the
380: hypothesis that the formation epochs of halos also depend on the shear of the
381: large-scale environment. In the high-shear environment the halos formed
382: relatively early without growing at late time due to strong tidal disruption
383: from the surrounding matter distribution. Thus, the late-type spirals are
384: likely to be located in this high-shear environment. Meanwhile in the
385: low-shear environment the halos formed relatively recently since there is
386: no strong tidal distribution, having grown at late times through hierarchical
387: merging. Hence, the ellipticals are likely to be found in this low-shear
388: environment. In the highly overdense regions, however, even in case that
389: there is tidal disruption from the surrounding matter distribution, the
390: other stronger effects of environmental processes should mask the
391: shear-dependence of galaxy properties. Likewise in the highly underdense
392: regions, the tidal field is too weak to produce any significant
393: galaxy-shear correlation. It will be interesting to test against N-body
394: simulations whether or not the formation epochs of galactic halos with
395: similar mass at similar density is a function of the ellipticity of
396: large-scale dark matter distribution. Our future work is in this direction.
397:
398: It should be noted here that our results suffer from low statistical
399: significance due to the small sample size. We have seen only a marginal effect
400: of the large-scale shear for the latest-type spirals (Scd-Sm). Meanwhile no
401: signal has been found for the Sb-Sc galaxies even though both types of
402: galaxies occupy similar regions. To remove the effect of the stronger
403: galaxy-density correlations, we had to constrain the overdensities of
404: galactic regions, which resulted in large errors. The null hypothesis that
405: there is no galaxy-shear correlation over the six bins is found to be rejected
406: at only the $10\%$ level due to large errors. Given our result, it will
407: require a sample of more than $100,000$ galaxies to test the hypothesis
408: at $>90\%$ confidence level. This line of investigation will provide new
409: insight into the formation and evolution of galaxies in a filamentary
410: cosmic web.
411:
412: \acknowledgments
413:
414: We are very grateful to P. Erdogdu for providing us the 2MRS density field.
415: We also thank an anonymous referee who helped us improve significantly the
416: original manuscript by making many helpful suggestions. This work is supported
417: by the Korea Science and Engineering Foundation (KOSEF) grant funded by the
418: Korean Government (MOST, NO. R01-2007-000-10246-0).
419:
420: The 2MRS density field was constructed by \citet{erd-etal06} by making
421: use of data products from the Two Micron All Sky Survey, which is a joint
422: project of the University of Massachusetts and the Infrared Processing and
423: Analysis Center/California Institute of Technology, funded by the National
424: Aeronautics and Space Administration and the national Science Foundation,
425: and the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) which is operated by the Jet
426: Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract
427: with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the SIMBAD
428: database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France.
429:
430:
431: \begin{thebibliography}{}
432: \bibitem[Bardeen et al.(1986)]{bar-etal86}
433: Bardeen, J.M., Bond, J.R.,Kaiser, N., \& Szalay, A.S. 1986, \apj, 304, 15
434: \bibitem[Bernardi et al.(2006)]{ber-etal06}
435: Bernardi, M., Nichol, R. C., Sheth, R. K., Miller, C. J.,
436: \& Brinkmann, J. 2006, \apj, 131, 1288
437: \bibitem[Blaton et al.(2005)]{bla-etal05}
438: Blaton, M.R., Eisenstein, D., Hogg, D. W., Schlegel, D. J.,
439: \& Brinkmann, J. 2005, \apj, 629, 143
440: \bibitem[Bond et al.(1996)]{bon-etal96}
441: Bond, J., R., Kofman, L., \& Pogosyan, D. 1996, Nature, 380, 603
442: \bibitem[Cervantes-Sodi \& Hernandez(2008)]{cer-her08}
443: Cervantes-Sodi, B. \& Hernandez, R. 2008, preprint
444: \bibitem[Choi et al.(2007)]{cho-etal07}
445: Choi, Y. Y., Park, C., \& Vogeley, M. 2007, \apj, 658, 884
446: \bibitem[Colless et al.(2001)]{col-etal01}
447: Colless et al. 2001, \mnras, 328, 1039
448: \bibitem[Coz et al.(2007)]{coz-pla07}
449: Coziol, R., \& Plauchu-Frayn 2007, \aj, 133, 2630
450: \bibitem[Croton et al.(2007)]{cro-etal07}
451: Croton, D. J., Gao, L., \& White, S. D. M. 2007, \mnras, 374, 1303
452: \bibitem[Dalal et al.(2008)]{dal-etal08}
453: Dalal, N., White, M., Bond, J. R., \& Shirokov, A. 2008, preprint
454: [arXiv:0803.3453]
455: \bibitem[de Vaucouleurs et al.(1991)]{dev-etal91}
456: de Vaucouleurs, G., de Vaucouleurs, A., Corwin, H. G., Jr., Buta, R. J.,
457: Patuerl, G. \& Fouque, P. 1991, Third Reference Catalogue of Bright Galaxies
458: (New York':Springer)
459: \bibitem[Desjacques(2007)]{des07}
460: Desjacques, V. 2007, preprint (astro-ph/0707.4671)
461: \bibitem[Dressler(1980)]{dre80}
462: Dressler, A. 1980, \apj, 236, 351
463: \bibitem[Erdogdu et al.(2006)]{erd-etal06}
464: Erdogdu, P. et al. 2006, \mnras, 373, 45
465: \bibitem[Gao et al.(2005)]{gao-etal05}
466: Gao, L., Volker, S., \& White, S. D. M. 2005, \mnras, 363, L66
467: \bibitem[Gomez et al.(2003)]{gom-etal03}
468: Gomez, P. et al. 2003, \apj, 584, 210
469: \bibitem[Goto et al.(2003)]{got-etal03}
470: Goto, et al. 2003, \mnras, 346, 601
471: \bibitem[Hernandez \& Cervantes-Sodi (2006)]{her-cer06}
472: Hernandez, R., \& Cervantes-Sodi, B. 2006, \mnras, 368, 351
473: \bibitem[Hernandez et al.(2007)]{her-etal07}
474: Hernandez, R. et al., 2007, \aj, 375, 163
475: \bibitem[Haynes \& Giovanelli(1984)]{hay-gio84}
476: Haynes, M. P. \& Giovanelli, R. 1984, \aj, 89, 758
477: \bibitem[Hockney \& Eastwood(1988)]{hoc-eas88}
478: Hockney, R. W. \& Eastwood, J. W. 1988,
479: Computer Simulation Using Particles (New York: Taylor \& Francis)
480: \bibitem[Huchra et al.(2005)]{huc-etal05}
481: Huchra, J. et al. 2005, in Nearby large scale structures and the zone of
482: avoidance (ed. Fairall, F. \& Woudt, P. A.) 135-142
483: (ASP Conf. Ser. 329, Astronomical Society of the Pacific, Cape Town)
484: \bibitem[Kaiser(1984)]{kai84}
485: Kaiser, N. 1984, \apj, 284, L9
486: \bibitem[Kuehn \& Ryden(2005)]{kue-ryd05}
487: Kuehn, F. \& Ryden, B. S. 2005, \apj, 634, 1032
488: \bibitem[Lauberts(1982)]{lau82}
489: Lauberts, A. 1982, ESO/Uppsala Survey of the ESO(B) Atlas.
490: (Garching:ESO)
491: \bibitem[Lee(2006)]{lee06}
492: Lee, J. 2006, \apj,
493: \bibitem[Lee \& Erdogdu(2007)]{lee-erd07}
494: Lee, J. \& Erdogdu, P. 2007, \apj,
495: \bibitem[Lewis et al.(2002)]{lew-etal02}
496: Lewis, I., et al. 2002, \mnras, 334, 673
497: \bibitem[Mateus et al.(2007)]{mat-etal07}
498: Mateus, A., Sodre Jr, L. Cid Fernandes, R. \& Stasinska, G. 2007, \mnras,
499: 374, 1457
500: \bibitem[Mo et al.(1998)]{mo-etal98}
501: Mo, H. J., Mao, S. \& White, S. D. M. 1998, \mnras, 295, 319
502: \bibitem[Navarro et. al.(2004)]{nav-etal04}
503: Navarro, J.F., Abadi, M.G., \& Steinmetz, M. 2004, \apj, 613, L41
504: \bibitem[Nilson(1974)]{nil74}
505: Nilson, P. 1974, Uppsala Astron. Obs. Ann., 6.
506: \bibitem[Owers et al.(2007)]{owe-etal07}
507: Owers, M. S. 2007, \mnras, 381, 494
508: \bibitem[Pandey \& Bharadwaj(2006)]{pan-bha06}
509: Pandey, B., \& Bharadwaj, S. 2006, \mnras,
510: \bibitem[Pandey \& Bharadwaj(2008)]{pan-bha08}
511: Pandey, B., \& Bharadwaj, S. 2008, \mnras in press
512: \bibitem[Park et al.(2007)]{par-etal07}
513: Park, C., Choi, Y. Y., Vogeley, M. S., Gott, J. R.,\& Blanton, M. R. 2007,
514: \apj, 658, 898
515: \bibitem[Park et al.(2008)]{par-etal08}
516: Park, C., Gott, J. R., \& Choi, Y. Y. 2008, \apj in press
517: \bibitem[Patiri et al.(2006)]{pat-etal06}
518: Patiri, S. G., Cuesta, A. J., Prada, F., Betancort-Rijo, J., \& Klypin, A.
519: 2006, \apj, 652, 75
520: \bibitem[Postman \& Geller(1984)]{pos-gel84}
521: Postman, M., \& Geller, M. J., 1984, \apj, 281, 95
522: \bibitem[Press et al.(1992)]{pre-etal92}
523: Press, W. H., Teukoksky, S. A., Vetterling, W. T. \& Flannery, B. P. 1992,
524: Numerical Recipes in FORTRAN (Cambridge : Cambridge Univ. Press)
525: \bibitem[Roediger \& Hensler(2005)]{roe-hen05}
526: Roediger, E. \& Hensler, G. 2005, \aap, 433, 875
527: \bibitem[Rojas et al.(2005)]{roj-etal05}
528: Rojas, R. R., Vogeley, M. S., Hoyle, F., \& Brinkmann, J. 2005, 624, 571
529: \bibitem[Sandvik et al.(2007)]{san-etal07}
530: Sandvik, H., Moller, O., Lee, J.,\& White, S. D. M. 2007, \mnras, 377, 234
531: \bibitem[Shen et al.(2006)]{she-etal06}
532: Shen, J., Abel, T., Mo, H. J.,\& Sheth, R. K. 2006, \apj, 645, 783
533: \bibitem[Sheth \& Tormen(2004)]{she-tor04}
534: Sheth, R.,\& Tormen, G. 2006, \mnras, 349, 1464
535: \bibitem[Springel et al.(2005)]{spr-etal05}
536: Springel, V. et al. 2005, \nat , 435, 629
537: \bibitem[Tanaka et al.(2004)]{tan-etal04}
538: Tanaka, M., Goto, T., Okamura, S., Shimasaku, K., \& Brinkman, J. 2004,
539: \aj, 128, 2677
540: \bibitem[Trujillo et. al.(2006)]{tru-etal06}
541: Trujillo, I., Carretero, C., \& Patiri, S. 2006, \apj, 610, L111
542: \bibitem[Vogeley et al.(2004)]{vog-etal04}
543: Vogeley, M. S. et al. 2004, Outskirts of Galaxy Clusters,
544: Proceedings IAU Colloquium No. 195
545: \bibitem[van den Bosch et al.(2007)]{van-etal07}
546: van den Bosch, F. C., Aquino, D., Yang, X., Mo, H. J., Pasquali, A.,
547: Mcintosh, D. H., Weinmann, S. M., \& Kang, X. 2007, \mnras,
548: submitted (astro-ph/0710.3164)
549: \bibitem[West(1989)]{wes89}
550: West, M. J. 1989, \apj, 347, 610
551: \bibitem[West(1994)]{wes94}
552: West, M. J. 1994, \mnras, 268, 79
553: \bibitem[Whitmore et al.(1993)]{whi-etal93}
554: Whitmore, B. C., Gilmore, D. M., \& Jones, C. 1993, \apj, 407, 489
555: \end{thebibliography}
556:
557: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
558: \clearpage
559: \begin{deluxetable}{cccc}
560: \tablewidth{0pt}
561: \setlength{\tabcolsep}{5mm}
562: \tablehead{Subsample & Class & Type & $N_{g}$ }
563: \tablecaption{}
564: \startdata
565: E & Ellipticals & cE,E0,E0-1,E+ & $1008$ \\
566: L & Lenticulars & S0$^{-}$,S0$^{o}$,S0$^{+}$ & $2532$ \\
567: SI & Spirals & S0a,Sa & $1761$ \\
568: SII & Spirals & Sab,Sb & $3175$ \\
569: SIII & Spirals & Sbc,Sc & $4507$ \\
570: SIV & Spirals & Scd,Sd,Sdm,Sm & $2679$ \\
571: \enddata
572: \label{tab:type}
573: \end{deluxetable}
574: %\end{tabular}
575: %\end{table}
576: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
577: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
578: \clearpage
579: \begin{figure}
580: \begin{center}
581: \plotone{f1.eps}
582: \caption{The probability density distributions of the three eigenvalues
583: of the 2MRS tidal shear field.}
584: \label{fig:pro}
585: \end{center}
586: \end{figure}
587: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
588: \clearpage
589: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
590: \begin{figure}
591: \begin{center}
592: \plotone{f2.eps}
593: \caption{The Aitoff Projections of the tidal shear eigenvalue field in
594: Supergalactic coordinates at $8000$ km/s: $\lambda_{1}$ (top), $\lambda_{2}$
595: (middle), $\lambda_{3}$ (bottom)}
596: \label{fig:ait}
597: \end{center}
598: \end{figure}
599: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
600: \clearpage
601: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
602: \begin{figure}
603: \begin{center}
604: \plotone{f3.eps}
605: \caption{The conditional number densities of the galaxies located in the
606: void-like, sheet-like, filament-like and halo-like regions for the six
607: subsamples with Poisson errors.}
608: \label{fig:con}
609: \end{center}
610: \end{figure}
611: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
612: \begin{figure}
613: \begin{center}
614: \plotone{f4.eps}
615: \caption{Mean of the density difference averaged over the regions where the
616: Tully galaxies of each subsample are located. The Tully galaxies are
617: classified into six subsamples according to the galaxy morphological type.
618: The errors represent one standard deviation in the measurement of the
619: mean values.}
620: \label{fig:den}
621: \end{center}
622: \end{figure}
623: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
624: \clearpage
625: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
626: \begin{figure}
627: \begin{center}
628: \plotone{f5.eps}
629: \caption{Mean of the ellipticity difference (top) and the density
630: difference (bottom) averaged over each subsample with $\delta$ in the
631: range of $[-0.3,-0.1]$.}
632: \label{fig:ell1}
633: \end{center}
634: \end{figure}
635: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
636: \clearpage
637: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
638: \begin{figure}
639: \begin{center}
640: \plotone{f6.eps}
641: \caption{Same as Fig. \ref{fig:ell1} but with $\delta$ in the
642: range of $[0.05,0.1]$.}
643: \label{fig:ell2}
644: \end{center}
645: \end{figure}
646: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
647: \clearpage
648: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
649: \begin{figure}
650: \begin{center}
651: \plotone{f7.eps}
652: \caption{Same as Fig. \ref{fig:ell1} but with $\delta$ in the
653: range of $[0.2,0.4]$.}
654: \label{fig:ell3}
655: \end{center}
656: \end{figure}
657: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
658: \clearpage
659: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
660: \begin{figure}
661: \begin{center}
662: \plotone{f8.eps}
663: \caption{Same as Fig. \ref{fig:ell1} but with $\delta$ in the
664: range of $[0.5,1.06]$.}
665: \label{fig:ell4}
666: \end{center}
667: \end{figure}
668: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
669: \end{document}
670: