A fuzzy description of Quantum

Hall Physics

N.E.Grandi
 Landau Levels
 Single charged particle in an external uniform
magnetic field
B

1
2 1
2
 Landau Levels
 The classical dynamics is very simple

The trajectories are circular

B orbits with a fixed angular
velocity
 Landau Levels
 The quantum problem is more interesting

Independent of χ, that can be

used to label the degeneracy
 Landau Levels
 And we find the Landau levels

B
 Landau Levels
 Projecting the Hilbert space into the LLL

B
The projection induces noncommutativity
(Fuzzy plane)

If ~eB>>m we can project the

space into its fundamental
subspace
 Landau Levels
 Projecting before quantization is equivalent

B Dirac
Brackets
The projection induces noncommutativity
(Fuzzy plane again) Second Class
Constraint
 Landau Levels
 Space-space uncertainty relation: fuzzyness

The particle behaves as an

incompressible droplet

The degeneracy labeled by the

eigenvalues of x1 is given in terms
of the area per particle
The filling fraction is quantized in
integer multiples of e/~
 Landau Levels
 Some additional information
• The integer quantum Hall effect is explained in terms of
multiparticle wave functions of non interacting particles.
B
• The quantization of the filling fraction and the observed
independence of the peculiarities of the sample and stability
against perturbations and disorder, is explained in terms of
gauge invariance (Laughlin).
• Inclusion of the crystalline structure in a magnetic field can be
formulated with the help of noncommutative geometry and
magnetic translations (Bedllisard, van Elst, Shultz-Baldes) The
same is true for disordered lattices.
 Matrix description
 Successes and limitations
 Integer quantum Hall effect is completely explained in the
above picture. The quantization of the filling fraction is a strong
topological effect originated on gauge invariance

 To study more general filling fractions, we need to introduce the

notion of composite fermions or bosons and singular gauge
transformations.

 For the fractions of the formν =1/n Laughlin built a complete set
of wave functions on variational grounds. They take the form
 Fluid dynamical description
 System of many particles in a magnetic field

B Re-labeling symmetry
(permutation of the particles)
 Fluid dynamical description
 We take a continuum limit in a macroscopic scale

Lagrange description of a
fluid
 Fluid dynamical description
 The permutation symmetry becomes a gauge
symmetry under APD
B
 Fluid dynamical description
 The resulting theory has a very simple dynamics

Incompresible fluid
B
Propagation, if any,
localizes at the boundary.

Vortex solution

Vortices need sources

 Fluid dynamical description
 After quantization we get more information

Quantum noncommutativity
B
There is no quantization of
Quantization of the vortex
the filling fraction
charge in units of ν

Vortices acquire fractional

statistics
 Fluid dynamical description
 Some additional information
• The theory is equivalent to a U(1) Chern-
Simons, under the map xa = ya + (1/2πρo) εab Ab
B (Susskind-Bahcall)
• After solution of the constraint, the action
becomes that of a chiral boson at the boundary,
(Wen)
•The quantization of the filling fraction is not
needed to have gauge invariance (Polychronakos)
 Fluid dynamical description
 Successes and limitations
 It has vortex (quasihole and quasiparticle) solutions.
 The charge of the vortex is quantized in units of the filling
fraction.
 The vortices have fractional statistics.
 The dynamics is localized on the boundary

 We still need to add external sources.

 The filling fraction is NOT quantized!
 Noncommutative description
 Can we map the constraint to a commutator
like [xa,xb]?
B

Unique way Weyl

of doing
mapthat respecting
associativity
(Moyal product)
 Noncommutative description
 We have an auxiliary Hilbert space (it is not
the space of states)
B Operators in some auxiliary Hilbert space
A classical state corresponds to a choice of xa
operators

Its off-diagonal elements

diagonal elements represent
represent the
“mixing”
positionsbetween the particles
of each individual particle in
this classical state

Is only consistent with an 1 dimensional

space, then we have infinite number of
particles
 Noncommutative description
 The gauge (permutation) symmetry is now
given by unitary conjugations
B The unitary transformations
represent re-shuffling of the
particles

The value of the charge

is fixed by the constraint

The action is invariant

up to a total trace
 Noncommutative description
 The dynamics will necessarily be very simple
(infinite system, no boundary, no dynamics)
B

Particles
A continuum
are homogeneously
of x1
distributed
eigenvaluesonandx1 complete
and
delocalization
complete delocalized
on x2 on x2

Heisenberg algebra
 Noncommutative description
 This state is unique up to unitary transformations

The mostare
Particles
Equivalent localized particle
localized at
representation
has a nonzero
equally
of the radius,
separated
same radius
solution
while the outmost
and completely one is at
delocalized
infinity
in the angles

Heisenberg algebra
 Noncommutative description
 Vortex solutions need external sources

B minimum The most local operator,

implies

We add a δ source
 Noncommutative description
 To have a gauge invariant functional
integral, the filling fraction must be quantized
B The variation of the
action must be an integer
multiple of 2π

The fillingWinding
fraction is
topologically quantized
number
 Noncommutative description
 Quantization renders noncommutative the
matrix elements of the operators
Dirac
B Quantum
Brackets
noncommutativity

Second Class
Constraints

No dynamics

Constraint on
Classical
physical states
noncommutativity
 Noncommutative description
 Quantization renders noncommutative the
matrix elements of the operators
B Generator of unitary
Laughlin connection betweenconjugations
filling fraction and statistics Finite
Permutation
unitaryof
particles
conjugation

Statistics related to
filling fraction

No dynamics

Constraint on
physical states
 Noncommutative description
 Some additional information
• The theory is equivalent to a noncommutative
U(1) Chern-Simons theory in the infinite plane,
B under the map xa = ya + (1/2πρo) εab Ab
• There is no consistent way to formulate this
theory in a bounded region of space, there is no
local chiral boson (Grandi-Silva, Lugo,
Balanchadran-Gupta-Kurkcouglu)
• In R^2 the theory is classically (GS) and
quantum mechanically (Kaminsky-Okawa-Ooguri)
equivalent to the commutative U(1) Chern-Simons
• Nevertheless the quantization of the filling
fraction survives to this equivalence
(Polychronakos)
 Noncommutative description
 Successes and limitations
 It has vortex (quasihole and quasiparticle) solutions.
 The charge of the vortex is quantized in units of the filling
fraction.
 The vortices have fractional statistics.
 The particles have statistics according to the filling fraction.
 The filling fraction IS quantized!

 We still need to add external sources.

 We’ve lost boundary dynamics (infinite system).
 Matrix description
 We want a finite dimensional auxiliary Hilbert
space
B Operators in some auxiliary Hilbert space

Its diagonal elements represent the

positions, off diagonal elements
represent mixing
Additional “boundary” degrees of
freedom (vectors in the fundamental)

Is only consistent with an 1 dimensional

We get a modified action
space, then we have infinite number of
and constraint, that allow
particles
for finite dimension
 Matrix description
 Unitary (permutation) symmetry still present

Unitary re-shuffling of the

B particles acts on ψ in the
fundamental

The generator has

a fixed value
 Matrix description
 The dynamics now much more interesting

B
Most general solution, xp and
yp are integration constants
 Matrix description
 We have a solution representing a Hall droplet

The
Particles
most are
outer
localized
particleathas
fixed
a
finite
radiusradius
and completely
= quantum hall
droplet
delocalized around the circle
 Matrix description
 Vortex solutions don’t need any external source

The vortex pushes the boundary away

a finite distance

We don’t add any δ source

 Matrix description
 New solutions are obtained representing edge
states
B This is a new solution,
not unitarly equivalent to
the previous

Diagonal radius states

are mapped into non-
diagonal ones
 Matrix description
 The quantum theory is constructed as before

The have
We fillingthe
fraction
sameiscanonical
topologically
B commutators
quantized exactly
for xas
a
before

And additional canonical

commutators for ψ

The constraint relates statistics of

physical states with ν
 Matrix description
 The states can be found explicitly in terms of
a creation and annihilation basis
B This space of solutions is isomorphic to
Laughlin wave functions!
 Matrix description
 Some additional information
• The theory is equivalent to a matrix U(1) Chern-
Simons theory.
B • It can also be mapped into the Calogero or
Calogero-Suterland models (Polychronakos)
• Its quantum states have been shown to be exactly
given by the Laughlin wave functions (Hellerman-Van
Raamsdonk, Cappelli-Riccardi)
•It can be extended to include multilayer system and
spin of the fundamental constituent (Polychronakos-
Morariu)
•It is not known how to use this model to describe
more general filling fractions p/q
 Matrix description
 Successes and limitations
 This theory can describe finite samples.
 It has vortex (quasihole and quasiparticle) solutions included in
the theory without adding any external source.
 The charge of the vortex is quantized in units of the filling
fraction.
 The vortices have fractional statistics.
 The particles have statistics according to the filling fraction.
 The filling fraction is quantized as 1/n
 We have perturbations describing edge states
 The states of the theory are Laughlin wave functions!

 It does not apply to more general filling fractions

 Conclusions and outlook
 What’s left?
 The Chern-Simons Matrix Model solves many of the problems
of the previous formulations of FQHE.

 It captures much of the physics of this system, including

topological quantization, edge states and fractional statistics of
its excitations, its quantum states being described by Laughlin
wave functions

 Some more elaborated test still to be passed. For example the

calculation of tunneling exponents, the phase transition to a
Wigner crystal and the possibility of nonhomogeneous phases

 It still to be understood how to formulate a matrix model useful

to describe more general fillings. Moreover, the definition of
local observables is always difficult in noncommutative theories,
so they should be translated to fuzzy analogs.
Thanks!