Aims. Several authors have claimed to detect a significant cross-correlation between microwave WMAP anisotropies and the SDSS galaxy distribution. We repeat these analyses to determine the different cross-correlation uncertainties caused by re-sampling errors and field-to-field fluctuations. The first type of error concerns overlapping sky regions, while the second type concerns nonoverlapping sky regions. Methods. To measure the re-sampling errors, we use bootstrap and jack-knife techniques. For the field-to-field fluctuations, we use three methods: 1) evaluation of the dispersion in the cross-correlation when correlating separated regions of WMAP with the original region of SDSS; 2) use of mock Monte Carlo WMAP maps; 3) a new method (developed in this article), which measures the error as a function of the integral of the product of the self-correlations for each map. Results. The average cross-correlation for b > 30 deg. is significantly stronger than the re-sampling errors - both the jack-knife and bootstrap techniques provide similar results - but it is of the order of the field-to-field fluctuations. This is confirmed by the crosscorrelation between anisotropies and galaxies in more than the half of the sample being null within re-sampling errors. Conclusions. Re-sampling methods underestimate the errors. Field-to-field fluctuations dominate the detected signals. The ratio of signal to re-sampling errors is larger than unity in a way that strongly depends on the selected sky region. We therefore conclude that there is no evidence yet of a significant detection of the integrated Sachs-Wolfe (ISW) effect. Hence, the value of ΩΛ ≈ 0.8 obtained by the authors who assumed they were observing the ISWeffect would appear to have originated from noise analysis.
Comments: 5 pages, accepted to be published in A&A
[v1] 19 Feb 2010
Unique-IP document downloads: 104 times
Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.
Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.