## 4 The Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline
**Group** & \(N\) & \(\chi^{2}\) & \(C\) & \(P(\Delta_{1})\) & \(P(\Delta)\) & \(\Delta_{\rm II}\) & \(\sigma(\Delta_{\rm II})\) & \(\frac{\Delta_{\rm II}}{\sigma(\Delta_{\rm II})}\) & \(\Lambda\) & \(W^{2}\) & \(U^{2}\) \\ \hline
11 & 626 & **62.79** & **9.505** & **0.0002** & **0.0004** & \(-\)0.2365 & 0.0585 & \(-\)4.0459 & 1.197 & 0.6769 & \(-\)0.1641 \\
12 & 332 & 25.67 & \(-\)11.484 & 0.2992 & 0.6338 & \(-\)0.1247 & 0.0803 & \(-\)1.5534 & 0.549 & 0.1183 & \(-\)0.3470 \\
13 & 128 & 29.72 & \(-\)6.939 & 0.9148 & 0.9438 & 0.0022 & 0.1293 & 0.0174 & 0.621 & 0.0726 & \(-\)0.0905 \\
14 & 426 & 23.96 & 3.524 & 0.1700 & 0.2538 & \(-\)0.1201 & 0.0709 & \(-\)1.6941 & 0.779 & 0.1772 & \(-\)0.8586 \\
15 & 130 & 13.07 & \(-\)1.876 & 0.7906 & 0.7285 & \(-\)0.0036 & 0.1283 & \(-\)0.0283 & 0.589 & 0.0612 & \(-\)0.0036 \\
17 & 80 & 13.81 & \(-\)5.502 & 0.6210 & 0.7426 & \(-\)0.0996 & 0.1635 & \(-\)0.6093 & 0.818 & 0.1604 & 0.1604 \\
21 & 248 & 14.17 & 0.237 & 0.1196 & 0.2995 & \(-\)0.0351 & 0.0929 & \(-\)0.3780 & 1.143 & 0.4859 & 0.4789 \\
22 & 126 & 7.03 & 0.680 & 0.5463 & 0.8569 & 0.0979 & 0.1303 & 0.7514 & 0.618 & 0.1290 & \(-\)0.2775 \\
23 & 100 & 17.05 & \(-\)1.818 & 0.6127 & 0.7009 & 0.1398 & 0.1463 & 0.9560 & 0.468 & 0.0670 & \(-\)0.0148 \\
31 & 210 & **33.70** & **15.978** & **0.0004** & **0.0022** & 0.1371 & 0.1009 & 1.3586 & **1.794** & **1.3340** & **1.0848** \\
41 & 192 & 22.78 & 6.538 & 0.0495 & **0.0119** & \(-\)0.0040 & 0.1056 & \(-\)0.0381 & **1.371** & 0.5135 & \(-\)**0.4546** \\
42 & 230 & 24.65 & \(-\)3.775 & 0.4007 & 0.4443 & 0.0556 & 0.0965 & 0.5768 & 0.747 & 0.2420 & \(-\)0.5970 \\
44 & 80 & 26.72 & 7.946 & 0.0472 & 0.0498 & \(-\)0.2000 & 0.1635 & \(-\)1.2230 & 1.336 & 0.4800 & \(-\)0.1473 \\
51 & 228 & **29.64** & \(-\)0.409 & 0.0245 & **0.0184** & 0.0928 & 0.0969 & 0.9574 & **1.443** & 0.5956 & 0.5954 \\
52 & 172 & 21.61 & 3.039 & **0.0107** & 0.0399 & \(-\)0.2028 & 0.1115 & \(-\)1.8187 & **1.417** & **0.6913** & **0.6731** \\
53 & 260 & 13.32 & \(-\)3.290 & 0.5558 & 0.8212 & \(-\)0.0549 & 0.0907 & \(-\)0.6048 & 0.620 & 0.0862 & \(-\)0.0647 \\
61 & 258 & 19.85 & \(-\)3.128 & 0.8344 & 0.1754 & \(-\)0.0487 & 0.0911 & \(-\)0.5352 & 0.615 & 0.0900 & \(-\)0.1735 \\
64 & 102 & **28.73** & \(-\)7.542 & 0.1803 & 0.4877 & 0.0804 & 0.1448 & 0.5551 & 0.836 & 0.2517 & \(-\)0.2426 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Test for the isotropy of the orientations of the galaxy plane. The distribution of the angle \(\delta_{D}\) of galaxies; inclination was taken directly from the NBG Catalog. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline
**Group** & \(N\) & \(\chi^{2}\) & \(C\) & \(P(\Delta_{1})\) & \(P(\Delta)\) & \(\Delta_{\rm II}\) & \(\sigma(\Delta_{\rm II})\) & \(\frac{\Delta_{\rm II}}{\sigma(\Delta_{\rm II})}\) & \(\Lambda\) & \(W^{2}\) & \(U^{2}\) \\ \hline
11 & 626 & **60.01** & 5.955 & **0.0000** & **0.0000** & 0  
This fact obliges us to choose the best method of calculating the angle of inclination used in the new research method. Therefore, when calculating the new \"theoretical isotropic distributions\", various variants of calculating the angle of inclination were considered. The original [PERSON]'s Formula (6), [PERSON]'s approach (7), as well as two variations of these methods, were taken into account. Figures 3-10 show a comparison of these variants in terms of calculating the angle of inclination for four Tully groups unrelated to the direction toward the LSC center. For comparison, next to three sufficiently numerous groups (12, 42, 53), one less numerous group (17) was selected. It turned out that adding \(3^{\circ}\) to the calculated angle of inclination leads to a noticeable change in the distribution of the calculated angles \(\delta_{D}\) and \(\eta\). In its original assumption, as used by [PERSON], for example, the addition of \(3^{\circ}\) was intended to