0.5cm

<span>Bum-Hoon Lee$^{1}$, Kyungsun Moon$^{2}$ and Chaiho Rim$^{3}$</span>

<span>$^{1}$Department of Physics, Sogang University, C.P.O. Box 1142, Seoul 100-611, Korea</span>

<span>$^{2}$Department of Physics and IPAP, Yonsei University, Seoul 120-749, Korea</span>

<span>$^{3}$Department of Physics, Chonbuk National University, Chonju 561-756, Korea</span>

0.3cm

<span>**ABSTRACT**</span>

> We revisit the quantum Hall system with no Zeeman splitting energy using the noncommutative field theory. We analyze the BPS condition for the delta-function interaction near the filling factor $\nu=1$. Multi-skyrmions are shown to saturate the BPS bounds. The dimension of the moduli space of $k$ skyrmions is $4k+2$. Advantage of the noncommutative field description is demonstrated through the derivation of the effective nonlinear $\sigma$ model Lagrangian.
>
> 0.5cm PACS: 11.10.Lm, 12.39.Dc, 73.20.Mf\
> Keywords: Quantum Hall system, skyrmion, noncommutative field theory\
> ———————————————————————\
> $^nathanhardy@example.com, $^nathanhardy@example.com\
> $^nathanhardy@example.com\

Introduction
============

In recent years there have been much interests in the noncommutative field theories motivated by the low energy effective theory of the string theory in the presence of the string background field $B_{\mu\nu}$ @seibergwitten [@jabbari]. The noncommutative field theories have shown many interesting properties. Especially, non-commutative solitons have been suggested, which have quite different properties from those in the ordinary field theories@soliton [@gms].

It has also been known in condensed matter physics that the electron system in the lowest Landau level in the strong magnetic field such as the quantum Hall system can be understood on the noncommutative nathanhardy@example.com. Naturally many works deal with the quantum Hall systems in terms of noncommutative field theories@bigatti2 [@gubser2; @susskind01; @myung] in a general setting. Moreover, it was presented in @pasquier [@pasquier2] that the skyrmionic excitation on a sphere is the soliton in the noncommutative field theory. The presentation of the skyrmion is very suggestive but seems not manifest in terms of the noncommutative field theory, not to mention the dipole description.

In this paper, we revisit the multi-skyrmions on the planar quantum Hall system near the filling factor $\nu=1$, in the limit of vanishing Zeeman splitting energy. The energy of the system is bounded below. The way how the multi-skyrmion configuration in the lowest Landau level (LLL) saturates the energy is more intriguing than that in the full two-dimensional system. For the delta-function interaction, multi-skyrmion solutions saturating this BPS bounds are explicitly constructed.

The quantum Hall system is also described in terms of the second quantized field theory where the electron states are projected to the LLL. Based on the Hartree-Fock approximation, the system is constructed so that the potential is written in the manifest noncommutative form.

In section 2, we review the single electron in the LLL using the coherent state representation, emphasizing the noncommutativity coming from the projection to the LLL. We also introduce the $*$-product of functions that is convenient to deal with the noncommutative properties of the LLL system. In section 3, in terms of the second quantized fields on the LLL with zero Zeeman energy, the microscopic multi-skyrmion ansatz is presented. For the system near $\nu=1$ with delta-function interaction, the bound saturating BPS condition is shown to be satisfied by the multi-skyrmion ansatz. According to the parameters of the explicitly constructed multi-skyrmion solutions, the dimension of the moduli space of $k$ skyrmions is shown $4k+2$, corresponding to the $2k$ positions, $k$ individual planar spin orientation, $k$ sizes, and $2$ the global spin axis(direction).

In section 4, we reformulate the system using the $*$-product language to analyze the system studied in section 3. In section 5, we derive in two ways the low-energy effective field theory for the system: The $O(3)$ non-linear $\sigma$ model@moon [@Sondhi], which describes the ferromagnetic spin fluctuations in two-dimensions. Its topological excitation is known to be skyrmion @Rajaraman. The first method uses the traditional many-body methods based on the Landau gauge. The second method uses the noncommutative field theory which employs the $*$-product. Comparing with the usual many-body approach, we point out the usefulness of the noncommutative field theoretic approach for the LLL physics. Finally, section 6 is the summary of our results.

Lowest Landau Level systems and Noncommutative <span>$*-$</span>product
=======================================================================

We start with brief review of a charged particle state in a strong magnetic field in terms of creation and annihilation operators. In the symmetric gauge, the magnetic field is given by the vector potential $A_x=-{By/ 2},\ A_y= {Bx/ 2}$. We will choose the unit of magnetic length $\ell = (\hbar c/e B)^{1/2}$ to be 1 in case of no confusion. In terms of the complex coordinates $z=x+iy$ and $\bar z=x-iy$, one can define two sets of oscillators: $$\begin{aligned}
a=\sqrt{2}({\bar \partial} +{z} /4)&,&\
a^+=\sqrt{2}(-{\partial} +{\bar z}/4) \nonumber\\
b=\sqrt{2}({\partial} +{\bar z}/4)&,&\ b^+=\sqrt{2}(-{\bar
\partial} +{z}/4) \,,\end{aligned}$$ where $\partial $ ($\bar \partial $)is a holomorphic (anti-holomorphic) derivative satisfying $\partial \, z =1$ ($\bar
\partial \, \bar z =1 $) . The operators satisfy commutation relations, $ [a, a^\dagger]=1 $, $ [b, b^\dagger]=1 $ and others mutually commuting.

The Hamiltonian is described in terms of the first set of oscillators, $a$ and $a^+$, $$H= \hbar \omega_c(a^+a+\frac{1}{2})$$ where $\omega_c = (m^* c / e B) $ is the cyclotron frequency. The energy eigenvalues of the Landau levels (LL) are $E_n=\hbar
\omega_c (n+ 1/2 )$ with $n$ non-negative integer.

Each LL is degenerate and the degenerate state is distinguished in terms of the second set of oscillators, $b$ and $b^+$, which describe the guiding center coordinates. Using the angular momentum operator $L=2(b^+b-a^+a)$ which commutes with the Hamiltonian $[L, H]=0$, one may assign quantum numbers to the degenerate states: $|n,l\rangle$. Since $L$ satisfies the algebra $$\begin{aligned}
[L,b^+]=b^+ \,,\quad  [L,b]=-b\end{aligned}$$ one raises (lowers) the angular momentum using $b^+$ ($b$) within each LL.

The lowest Landau level is the set of states with $n=0$, which is killed by $a$. The wave functions are of the form of $\psi(z)=
f(z) e^{- z \bar{z}/4}$ with $f(z)$ a complex analytic function that does not grow too fast. This analyticity is the difference from that of the excited states, where $f$ is the arbitrary function of $z$ and $\bar z$, $f(z, \bar {z})$, in general.

The angular momentum eigenstate in the LLL as $|l \rangle =
\frac{1}{\sqrt{l !}} {b^\dagger}^l |0\rangle$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
 \langle z |l \rangle \equiv \Phi_l(z)
 =\frac{z^l}{\sqrt{2\pi
2^l l ! }}e^{-z\bar{z}/4}.\label{ang-mom-wavefunction}\end{aligned}$$ This state forms thin shells of radius $\sqrt{2(l+1)}$ occupying an area $2\pi$ since it is normalized as $ \langle z | z \rangle
= 1/2\pi$. The orbital degeneracy of a given Landau level is thus $N_{\phi}=A/{2\pi}$, where $A$ is the total area.

Coherent state $|\zeta\rangle$, on the other hand, is the most localized state in the LLL, which is defined as the eigenstate of the annihilation operator $b$ as $\/ b|\zeta\rangle = {\bar
\zeta}|\zeta\rangle\/,$ or $\langle\zeta|b^\dagger = \langle\zeta|
{\zeta}$ . The explicit construction is given as $|\zeta\rangle
= N_\zeta e^{\, {\bar \zeta} b^\dagger } |0\rangle$ where $|0\rangle \equiv |0,0\rangle $ is the vacuum state. If we choose the normalization constant $N_\zeta=
e^{-\frac{1}{2}\bar{\zeta}\zeta}/ \sqrt{2 \pi}$ so that $\langle
\zeta | \zeta \rangle =  1 / 2\pi$, then the coherent state has the angular momentum component, $$\label{coherent}
  \langle \zeta | l \rangle =
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi l !}} \zeta^l
e^{-\frac{1}{2}\bar{\zeta}\zeta}\,.$$ This allows one to identify the coherent state eigenvalue $\zeta$ with the coordinate $z$ for the LLL, $$\label{coord}
\zeta = {z  \over \sqrt{2}} \, ,\quad  {\bar \zeta} = {\bar z
\over \sqrt{2} }\,.$$ Therefore, the LLL can be represented using either the angular momentum basis or the coherent state basis.

The LLL is the projection of the Hilbert space into a subspace. Any operator $\cal{O}$ acting on the larger Hilbert space of LL can be similarly projected out so that the projected operator denoted as $\hat{\cal{O}}$ acts only on the LLL states. This projection is to put $a$-oscillators zero after normal ordering. For example, a plane wave operator $e^{i{\bf p}\cdot{\bf r}}=
e^{2i(\bar{p}z+p\bar{z})} = e^{i\sqrt{2}(\bar{p}a +p a^\dagger)}
e^{i\sqrt{2}({\bar p}b^\dagger +{p} b)}$ becomes $e^{-{p}
\bar{p}}e^{i\sqrt{2}({\bar p} b^\dagger +{p} b)}$, where $p=(p_x +
i p_y)/2$ and $\bar{p} =(p_x - i p_y)/2$.

One may choose any basis for the projected operators or their matrix elements. Angular momentum basis is the simplest. $|l\rangle\langle m |= :\frac{1}{\sqrt{l !}} {b^{\dagger}}^l
e^{-b^\dagger b} \frac{1}{\sqrt{m !}} b^{m}: $ ( $:~:$ is the normal ordered product). On the other hand, the coherent state basis provides a useful perspective for the non-commutativeness of the projected operators. The matrix elements of the projected identity operator with respect to the angular momentum states will be $\delta_{mn}$. In the coherent basis, the corresponding delta-function for the projected identity operator will be the gaussian function : $$\sum_l \langle \zeta |l \rangle \langle l |\zeta'\rangle ={1\over
2\pi}
\exp(-\frac{1}{4}|z|^2-\frac{1}{4}|z'|^2+\frac{1}{2}z\bar{z}')
\equiv \delta(z, z'). \label{proj-delta-fn}$$ Note that $b$ ($b^\dagger$) is realized as ${\bar \zeta}$ (${\zeta}$), and each forms one-dimensional subspace. However, since $b$ and $b^\dagger$ do not commute, the two dimensional space induces the noncommutativity and hence forms a noncommutative plane @read.

It is well known that the multiplication of the non-commuting operators can be realized in terms of the $*$-product of the corresponding ordinary functions. The product of operators defined on the noncommutative space of $b$ and $b^+$ is isomorphic to the $*$-product of functions $f(\zeta)$. One way of realizing this isomorphism is to relate the normal ordered plane wave-like operators $: e^{i({\bar p}b^\dagger +{p} b)}: $ to the plane wave function $e^{-i(\bar p \zeta +  p \bar \zeta)}$. For the operator defined by the Fourier transform @read [@pasquier], $$\label{*operator}
 \hat{O}_f(b,b^+ ) = \int { d^2p \over (2\pi)^2}
\tilde{f}(p, {\bar p } ) : e^{-i( {\bar p} b^+ + p b) } :$$ the corresponding function $f(z,\bar z)$ is then given by $$f (\zeta,{\bar \zeta} )= \langle \zeta| \hat{O}_f(b,b^+ )| \zeta \rangle
 =\int { d^2p \over (2\pi)^2}
\tilde{f}(p, {\bar p } ) e^{-i( \bar p \zeta +  p \bar \zeta) } .$$ The isomorphism of the $*$-product $$\hat{O}_{f}\cdot \hat{O}_{g} = \hat{O}_{f* g}$$ is easily verified if the $*$-product of functions is defined as $$\left( f * g \right)(\zeta, \bar{\zeta})=e^{
\partial_{{\bar \zeta}}\partial_{{\zeta^\prime}}} f(\zeta, \bar{\zeta})
g(\zeta^{\prime}, \bar{\zeta^\prime}) |_{\zeta =\zeta^{\prime}}.$$ If the function $f(\zeta , { \bar \zeta} )$ is defined in terms of the complex coordinates $z$ and $\bar z$, then using the relation Eq. (\[coord\]) we have $$( f * g ) (z, {\bar z})= e^{ 2 {\bar \partial}  \partial^\prime }
f(z, \bar z ) g( z^{\prime }, \bar{ z^\prime } )  |_{z =
z^{\prime}} \,. \label{*product}$$ This $*$-product is called $Q$-product in @pasquier. We will just call this $*$-product.

This $*$-product enables one to write the expectation value of the product of operators simply in terms of the corresponding function $$\langle \zeta| \hat{O}_{f}\cdot \hat{O}_{g} | \zeta \rangle =
\langle \zeta| \hat{O}_{f* g}| \zeta \rangle
 = f*g (\zeta , { \bar \zeta} ) .$$ The noncommutativity of $*$-product of functions is due to the projection of the general states into the LLL.

We remark by passing that one may define different relations between the operator and the function from Eq. (\[\*operator\]), which results in a different form of $*$-product. For example, by using the Weyl ordering rather than the normal ordering, one may have the so-called Moyal product where the front exponential factor in Eqs.(\[\*product\]) will be given in terms of an antisymmetric form. In this article, $Q$-product is used since it gives the natural functional relation for the spin system in quantum Hall system.

Skyrmion solutions: The BPS soliton
===================================

We consider the quantum Hall system near $\nu=1$ with zero Zeeman energy. In order to describe the many electron system in the LLL with spin degeneracy, we introduce $\Psi$ operator which projects to the LLL, $$\begin{aligned}
\Psi =\sum_{l \sigma} |l,\sigma \rangle c_{l\sigma} \,.\end{aligned}$$ The Hilbert space for this operator is the tensor product of ${\cal{H}}^{(1)}$ and ${\cal{H}}_n$, <span>*i.e.*</span> the LLL state and the occupation number states, respectively. The second quantized field operator $\Psi_{\sigma}(z)$ projected down to the LLL with spin $\sigma$ is written as $$\begin{aligned}
\Psi_{\sigma}(z)=\sum_{l,\sigma'} \langle z, \sigma|l, \sigma'
\rangle c_{l\sigma'} = \sum_{l} \langle z|l \rangle c_{l\sigma}
\,.\end{aligned}$$

The second quantized operator $c_{l\sigma}\ (c^\dagger_{l\sigma})$ which annihilates (creates) electron in the $l^{\rm th}$ orbital with spin $\sigma$ satisfies the ordinary anticommutation relations $$\begin{aligned}
&&\{c_{l\sigma},c_{m\sigma'}\}=\{c^\dagger_{l\sigma},c^\dagger_{m\sigma'}\}
=0
\nonumber \\
&& \{c_{l\sigma},c^\dagger_{m\sigma'}\}=\delta_{lm}
\delta_{\sigma\sigma'} .
$$ On the other hand, the field operator satisfies $$\begin{aligned}
&&\{\Psi_{\sigma}(z),\Psi_{\sigma'}(z')\}=\{\Psi^\dagger_{\sigma}(z),\Psi^\dagger
_{\sigma'}(z')\} =0
\nonumber \\
&& \{\Psi_{\sigma}(z),\Psi^\dagger_{\sigma'}(z')\}=
\delta_{\sigma\sigma'}\delta(z,z')\,,\end{aligned}$$ where the delta-function in $z$ has the gaussian form in Eq.(\[proj-delta-fn\]), not the usual two dimensional delta-function, which reflects the projection to the LLL. To emphasize the projection to LLL we use only $z$ and no $\bar z$ in $\Psi_\sigma$.

The field operator $\Psi_{\sigma}(z)$ ($\Psi^\dagger_{\sigma}(z)$) annihilates (creates) an electron with a spin $\sigma$ at position $z$ in the LLL. However, this interpretation is to be reserved with the projected delta-function. Only the operator $\Psi(z,\bar
z)$ ($\Psi^\dagger_{\sigma}(z,\bar z)$) with the full fermionic annihilation (creation) operators $c_{(n,l)\sigma}\
(c^\dagger_{(n,l)\sigma})$ to all states $|(n,l), \sigma\rangle$ will satisfy the anticommutation rule with the true two-dimensional delta-function and hence will annihilate (create) the electron at the position $(z,\bar z)$. This projection results in the noncommutative space and also becomes the source of non-trivial electron excitation as we will see below.

In terms of the field operators $\Psi_{\sigma}(z)$ and $\Psi^\dagger_{\sigma}(z)$, the Hamiltonian of the system is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\hat V= {1\over 2} \sum_{\sigma,\sigma^\prime} \int d^2 z \int d^2
z^\prime V(|z-z^\prime|)
\Psi^\dagger_{\sigma}(z)\Psi^\dagger_{\sigma^\prime}(z^\prime)
\Psi_{\sigma^\prime}(z^\prime) \Psi_{\sigma}(z)\,.\end{aligned}$$ The ground state wavefunction for the completely filled $\nu=1$ LLL system is given by $|\Psi_0\rangle = \prod_{l}
c^\dagger_{l\uparrow}|0\rangle$, where all the spins are aligned parallel to each other. In the coordinate basis, it can be written by $$\begin{aligned}
\langle z_1,..,z_N|\Psi_0\rangle=
\Psi_V(z_1,..,z_N)|\uparrow\uparrow
\uparrow\uparrow\cdots\uparrow\rangle . \label {groundwave}\end{aligned}$$ where $\Psi_V$ is the Vandermonde determinant given by $$\begin{aligned}
\Psi_V=\prod_{i<j} (z_i-z_j) \exp^{-\sum_k |z_k|^2/4}.
$$

In free theory, any combination of $N$ states out of $2N$ states of any spin configurations will all be degenerate. The Couloumb interactions and the Zeeman splitting energy of the real system will lift the above tremendous degeneracy. In the exact $\nu=1$ case, the ground state will still be the one in Eq.(\[groundwave\]). In the absence of Zeeman splitting, there still exists extra spin degeneracy of $2 S_{\rm tot} +1$ with $S_{\rm tot} = N / 2$. The system is called quantum Hall ferromagnet. The lowest energy charge carriers of the system are known to be skyrmions, which are spin-texture states and are topological in nature. The following <span>*variational*</span> ansatz for the skyrmion wavefunction was proposed by Moon <span>*et al.*</span>@moon $$\psi_\lambda = \prod_m \left(
    \begin{array}{c}
    z_m \\ \lambda
    \end{array}
\right) \Psi_V \label{skyrmionwavefn}$$ When $|z|$ is smaller than $\lambda$, spins tend to align to the $-{\hat z}$ direction. For $|z| \gg \lambda$, spins remain aligned to the ${\hat z}$ direction, and so the parameter $\lambda$ represents the size of the skyrmion.

In terms of the angular momentum basis $|m\rangle$, this skyrmion wave function is in the form of $$|\Phi ; k \rangle =
\prod_m (\alpha_{m+k}c^\dagger_{{m+k}\uparrow} +\gamma_m
c^\dagger_{m\downarrow})|0\rangle ,
$$ where $k$ stands for the topological charge (winding number) of the skyrmion. Here $k$ also represents the deficit of the number of electrons from the completely filled $\nu=1$ state: $k = N -
N_e$.

For the delta-function interaction: $V(|z - z^\prime|)=V_0
\delta^2 (z - z^\prime)$, the Hamiltonian of the system is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\hat V= V_0 \int d^2 z
\Psi^\dagger_{\downarrow}(z)\Psi^\dagger_{\uparrow}(z)
\Psi_{\uparrow}(z) \Psi_{\downarrow}(z) \,.\end{aligned}$$ This is a nonnegative operator with nonnegative energy for any states. We will show that the skyrmion wavefunction $\psi_\lambda$ saturates the inequality bounds of the energy. That is, the skyrmion state satisfy the BPS condition of being annihilated by the interaction operator ${\hat V}$: $$\label{BPSequation}
\Psi_{\uparrow}(z) \Psi_{\downarrow}(z)|\psi_\lambda\rangle=0.$$ We impose the above BPS condition to the general state $|\Phi ; k
\rangle$ with $k=1$ and try to get the condition for $\alpha_m$ and $\gamma_m$. By explicitly writing down the field operator $\Psi_{\sigma}(z)$ in terms of $c_{l\sigma}$, the annihilation condition can be written by $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{l,m} \Phi_l (z) \Phi_m (z) c_{l\uparrow}
c_{m\downarrow}|\Phi ; 1\rangle ,\end{aligned}$$ where $\Phi_m (z) = \langle z | m \rangle$ is the angular momentum wavefunction in Eq. (\[ang-mom-wavefunction\]). The coefficients $\alpha_m, \gamma_m$ should satisfy the following relations $$\begin{aligned}
{1 \over \sqrt{m+1}} {\alpha_{m+1} \over \gamma_m} = {\rm const}.
\label{BPS1}\end{aligned}$$ We will calculate the spin profile of the state $|\Phi ; 1
\rangle$ satisfying Eq.(\[BPS1\]). With the choice of the constant to be $\sqrt{2} e^{i\theta_0} / \lambda$, the expectation values of the spin operators in the state $|\Phi ; 1
\rangle$ are given by $$\begin{aligned}
&& \langle S^\dagger (z) \rangle \equiv \langle \Phi ; 1 |
\Psi^\dagger_{\uparrow} (z) \Psi_{\downarrow} (z) | \Phi ; 1
\rangle = e^{-i\theta_0} {{\bar z} \over \lambda} \sum_m
|\gamma_m|^2 |\Phi_m (z)|^2
\nonumber \\
&& \langle S^{-} (z) \rangle \equiv \langle \Phi ; 1 |
\Psi^\dagger_{\downarrow} (z) \Psi_{\uparrow} (z) | \Phi ; 1
\rangle = e^{i\theta_0} {z \over  \lambda} \sum_m |\gamma_m|^2
|\Phi_m (z)|^2
\nonumber \\
&& \langle S_z (z) \rangle \equiv {1 \over 2}\langle \Phi ; 1 |
\Psi^\dagger_{\uparrow} (z) \Psi_{\uparrow} (z) -
\Psi^\dagger_{\downarrow } (z) \Psi_{\downarrow} (z) | \Phi ; 1
\rangle
\nonumber \\
&& \, \, \, \, \,= {1\over 2} \left( {|z|^2 \over \lambda^2}
-1\right) \sum_m |\gamma_m|^2 |\Phi_m (z)|^2 ,\end{aligned}$$ where the coefficient $\gamma_m$ is determined by the normalization condition: $\gamma_m = 1 / \sqrt{1 + 2
(m+1)/\lambda^2}$ @Mac. By normalizing the spin-density fields over the unit area $2\pi \ell^2$ and multiplying by a factor of $2$ to make the magnitude of the spin 1 : ${\bf m}=4\pi
\langle {\bf S} \rangle$, the magnetization field ${\bf m}$ is given in the polar coordinates as follows $$\begin{aligned}
&& m_x ({\bf r}) = {2r \over \lambda} \cos (\theta + \theta_0)
{\cal C}(r)
\nonumber \\
&& m_y ({\bf r}) = -{2r \over \lambda} \sin (\theta + \theta_0)
{\cal C}(r)
\nonumber \\
&& m_z ({\bf r}) = \left( {r^2 \over \lambda^2} -1\right) {\cal
C}(r) ,\end{aligned}$$ where the function ${\cal C}(r)= 2\pi \sum_m |\gamma_m|^2 |\Phi_m
(z)|^2$. If we force to impose the normalization condition: $|{\bf m}| = 1$, we can show that the function ${\cal C}(r)$ is equal to $1 / [(r / \lambda)^2 +1 ]$ and ${\bf m}$ agrees <span>exactly</span> with the classical skyrmion solution for the $O(3)$ non-linear $\sigma$ model @Rajaraman. For example, with the choice of $\theta_0=0$, the magnetization field ${\bf m}$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
m_x ({\bf r}) = {2(x / \lambda)  \over (r / \lambda)^2 +1 },{}{}
m_y ({\bf r}) = -{2(y / \lambda) \over (r / \lambda)^2 +1 },{}{}
m_z ({\bf r}) = {(r / \lambda)^2 -1 \over (r / \lambda)^2 +1 } .\end{aligned}$$ By calculating the function ${\cal C}(r)$ explicitly, one can obtain the following result $${\cal C}(r)= \cases{1 / ( 1 + 2 /\lambda^2 ) & for $r \rightarrow
0$ \cr (r / \lambda)^{-2} & for $r > \lambda, \ell$} .$$ For large skyrmions: $\lambda \gg \ell$, the function ${\cal
C}(r)$ indeed agrees with the classical solution. However, for smaller ones, it deviates from the classical solution due to the strong quantum fluctuations leading to $|{\bf m}| < 1$ @kmoon3. We notice that the skyrmion size and the relative global spin orientations are determined by the choice of $\lambda$ and $\theta_0$, and the skyrmion energy is scale-invariant.

In the complex position space, the states $|\Phi ; 1 \rangle$ satisfying Eq.(\[BPS1\]) are in the form of $\psi_\lambda$ in Eq. (\[skyrmionwavefn\]). Hence, $\psi_\lambda$ is the <span>*exact*</span> skyrmion solutions of the system, being the minimum of the potential energy $\langle {\hat V} \rangle$ bounded from below by $0$. The most general form of the skyrmion with unit charge will be $$\psi_1 = \prod_m \left(
    \begin{array}{c}
    z_m -\xi_1\\ a (z_m -\xi_2)
    \end{array}
\right) \Psi_V \, .
$$ We have three complex parameters for the moduli. The parameter $a$ is related to the background spin orientation of the skyrmion. The center of mass value $\xi_c = (\xi_1+\xi_2)/2$ is related to the location of the skyrmion, while the difference $\lambda =
(\xi_1-\xi_2)/2$ represents the size and the $U(1)$ planar orientation. This can be easily seen from the fact that $\psi_1$ can be written in the similar form as in Eq. (\[skyrmionwavefn\]) by making the spin rotation, $$\psi_1 = \prod_m \left(
    \begin{array}{c}
    z_m - \xi_c\\ \lambda
    \end{array}
\right) \Psi_V'
$$ with respect to the globally rotated background spin.

Now we want to show that the multi-skyrmions are indeed BPS solitons. The condition for the skyrmion to be a BPS soliton is that the multi-soliton solutions are also annihilated by the interaction ${\hat V}$, Eq. (\[BPSequation\]). We study the two skyrmion system. The following ansatz can correctly describe the two skyrmion system, where one skyrmion is located at $z=a$ and the other at $z=-a$ $$\psi_2 = \prod_m \left(
    \begin{array}{c}
    (z_m-a) (z_m+a) \\ \lambda^2
    \end{array}
\right) \Psi_V\,.$$ When $a$ goes to zero, it reproduces a single $k=2$ skyrmion wavefunction. For $a \gg \lambda$, it represents two widely-separated skyrmions, whose size of each is about $\lambda^2/(2a)$ and so it decreases with the distance $2a$. As the distance $2a$ changes, the shape of the skyrmions are distorted. We will show that in spite of the distortions of the skyrmion shape, ${\hat V}$ still annihilates this two skyrmion state. We begin with the class of general states $|\Phi ;
2\rangle$, which includes the two skyrmion states too $$|\Phi ; 2 \rangle =
\prod_{m=0} (\alpha_{m+2}c^\dagger_{{m+2}\uparrow} +\beta_m
c^\dagger_{m\uparrow} + \gamma_m c^\dagger_{m\downarrow} )
|0\rangle \label{twoskyrmion-ansatz}.$$ Through the similar procedure to the single skyrmion case, we obtain the following conditions for the coefficients $\alpha_m$, $\beta_m$, and $\gamma_m$ $${1 \over \sqrt{(m+1)(m+2)}} {\alpha_{m+2} \over \gamma_m} = 2 a_1$$ and $${\beta_m \over \gamma_m} = a_2 ,$$ where $a_1, a_2$ are arbitrary complex constants. In the complex position space $z$, one can easily show that it is given by $$\Phi_2 (z) = \prod_m \left(
    \begin{array}{c}
    a_1 z_m^2 + a_2 \\ 1
    \end{array}
\right) \Psi_V \,,$$ which is the product of the Vandermonde determinant and the second order polynomials. One can generalize the two skyrmion ansatz to the multi-skyrmion ones, which can be written by $$|\Phi ; k \rangle =
\prod_{m} (\sum_{l=0}^{k_1} \alpha_{m+l}
c^\dagger_{m+l\uparrow} + \sum_{l=0}^{k_2}\gamma_{m+l}
c^\dagger_{m+l\downarrow} ) |0\rangle
$$ By imposing the BPS conditions to the above multi-skyrmion ansatz@pasquier2 [@moon], the corresponding manybody wavefunction in the $z$-space is written by $$\Phi_k (z) = \prod_m \left(
    \begin{array}{c}
    f_{\uparrow} (z_m) \\ f_{\downarrow} (z_m)
    \end{array}
\right) \Psi_V \,,$$ which again shows that it is the product of $\Psi_V$ and the polynomial functions. The functions $f_{\uparrow} (z),
f_{\downarrow} (z)$ are polynomials of order $k_1$ and $k_2$, respectively. The zeros of the polynomials represent the positions of skyrmions, since the electrons are repelled by the zeros. Hence they describe the manybody skyrmion wavefunctions with the skyrmion number: $k=max [k_1, k_2]$.

Generically, the number of complex coefficients of $f_{\uparrow}
(z), f_{\downarrow} (z)$ are $2(k+1)$. One complex number is related to the normalization of the wave function. Hence we are left with $4k+2$ real parameters for the multi-skyrmions with skyrmion number $k$. Two real parameters from the ratio of the coefficients of $z^k$ powers in $f_{\uparrow} (z), f_{\downarrow}
(z)$ account for the global spin orientation in the asymptotic region. For the well separated skyrmions, the remaining $4k$ parameters can be nicely interpreted as follows : We associate 4 real parameters for each skyrmion with two real parameters for the position, one for the size and one for the $U(1)$ orientation. This is consistent with the fact that the multi-skyrmions are BPS states with no interactioin energy.

Since any order of polynomials of the above form is annihilated by ${\hat V}$, skyrmion is the BPS soliton.

The $*$-product representation of the potential
===============================================

The potential energy of a state $|\Phi\rangle$ is written as $${\cal V} = \langle \Phi|\hat V |\Phi\rangle
 = \frac{1}{2}
 \int {\ d^2 z_1 } \int {\ d^2 z_2}~
 V(|z_1-z_2|) ~ \rho (z_1 | z_2)\,,
\label{energy}$$ where $V (|z_1-z_2|)$ is the Coulomb potential of particles at two points, $z_1$ and $z_2$. $\rho (z_1 | z_2)$ is the spin summed density correlation $$\rho (z_1 | z_2)=
\sum_{\sigma_1,\sigma_2}\rho (z_1;\sigma_1 | z_2; \sigma_2)$$ where the density correlation of a given spin configurations is defined as $$\rho (z_1;\sigma_1 | z_2; \sigma_2)
 =\langle \Psi^\dagger_{\sigma_1}(z_1) \Psi^\dagger_{\sigma_2}(z_2)
 \Psi_{\sigma_2}(z_2) \Psi_{\sigma_1}(z_1) \rangle \,.
 \label{density}$$ Here $\langle \cdots \rangle$ represents the expectation value with respect to a certain state $|\Phi\rangle$

As shown in the section 3, one may consider the simplest delta-function interaction, which allows the existence of a skyrmion solution. The skyrmion solution is not very sensitive to the shape of the potential and non-locality. So, we will replace the Coulomb potential $V (|z_1-z_2|)$ with a delta-function type potential and consider the skyrmion system in the noncommutative formalism $$V (|z_1-z_2|) = V_0~\delta^2(z_1-z_2)\,.
\label{potential}$$

The delta-function interaction simplifies the spin configuration, since $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$ contributes only when the two are different. Then the potential energy in (\[energy\]) is written as $${\cal V}  = \frac{V_0}{2}
 \int {{\ d^2 z }} ~ \rho (z_1 | z_2) |_{z_1 = z_2 =z}$$ We will carry the index $\{ z_1, z_2\}$ of the density correlation to avoid the possible confusion in the future.

Now the essence of the projection of the system to the LLL lies in the density correlation operator (\[density\]) where the fermion operator is decomposed in terms of the LLL states only. Therefore, to contrast the projected system with the full two dimensional system we use the $*$-product to the correlation as $$\rho(z_1;\sigma_1 | z_2; \sigma_2)
 =\langle (\Psi^\dagger_{\sigma_1}(z_1) \Psi^\dagger_{\sigma_2}(z_2))*
 (\Psi_{\sigma_2}(z_2) \Psi_{\sigma_1}(z_1)) \rangle \,.
 \label{*density}$$

The $*$-product provides a convenient way of book-keeping of the evaluation of operators, which reminds one of using the lowest Landau level. What makes this $*$-product useful lies in the possibility of presentation of the $*$-product in terms of functions corresponding to this formal fermion operators. Then, this $*$-product will provide a very simple way of finding an effective potential for small fluctuations such as magnons with respect to a certain background state.

The second quantized fermion operator cannot be simply represented in terms of functions but its expectation value. To do this, we start with the Hartree-Fock approximation of the density correlation using the Wick theorem $$\rho(z_1;\sigma_1 | z_2; \sigma_2)
 = 4\pi^2\left[d(z_1; \sigma_1| z_2; \sigma_2) - x(z_1 ;\sigma_1|z_2; \sigma_2)\right]\, ,
\label{HF}$$ where $d(z_1;\sigma_1 | z_2; \sigma_2)$ and $x(z_1;\sigma_1 | z_2;
\sigma_2)$ are direct and exchange terms of the given spin configuration respectively and are defined as $$\begin{aligned}
d(z_1; \sigma_1 | z_2;\sigma_2) &=&
\langle\Psi^\dagger_{\sigma_1}(z_1) \Psi_{\sigma_1}(z_1)\rangle
\langle \Psi^\dagger_{\sigma_2}(z_2)
\Psi_{\sigma_2}(z_2)\rangle /4\pi^2\nonumber\\
x(z_1 ;\sigma_1| z_2;\sigma_2) &=&  \langle
\Psi^\dagger_{\sigma_1}(z_1) \Psi_{\sigma_2}(z_2)\rangle \langle
\Psi^\dagger_{\sigma_2}(z_2) \Psi_{\sigma_1}(z_1) \rangle /4\pi^2
\, ,\end{aligned}$$ where the factor of $1/4\pi^2$ is attached since $\langle z| z
\rangle$ is normalized as $1/2\pi$. The potential Eq. (\[potential\]) becomes $${\cal V}  = 4\pi^2 V_0  \int {{\ d^2 z }}  \left[ d(z_1 ;\uparrow|
z_2; \downarrow) - x(z_1;\uparrow | z_2; \downarrow)
 \right]|_{z_1 = z_2 =z}$$ due to the spin exchange symmetry of the potential. One may consider the up-down spin configuration only as far as the potential is concerned. However, since this formalism is to be extended to other physical quantity such as effective potential, it is desired to consider all the spin configurations together.

The H-F potential is evaluated in the projected space and therefore, this can be written in terms of the $*$-product. To find the functional structure of the projected space one defines operators, $D$ and $X$ corresponding to the functions $d$ and $x$, which live only on the projected space $|z_1\rangle \otimes | z_2
\rangle $ $$\begin{aligned}
d(z_1 | z_2)
&=& \sum_{\sigma_1, \sigma_2} d(z_1;\sigma_1 | z_2; \sigma_2)\nonumber\\
& =& \langle z_1 |\otimes \langle z_2| \, D \,
|z_1\rangle \otimes | z_2 \rangle \nonumber\\
x(z_1 | z_2)
&=& \sum_{\sigma_1, \sigma_2} x(z_1;\sigma_1 | z_2; \sigma_2)\nonumber\\
 & = & \langle z_1 |\otimes \langle z_2| \, X \,
|z_1\rangle \otimes | z_2 \rangle \,.\end{aligned}$$ Let us evaluate this $D$ and $X$ operators explicitly for $|\Phi\rangle$, $$|\Phi; k \rangle =
\prod_m (\alpha_{m+k} \, c^\dagger_{{m+k}\uparrow} +\gamma_m \,
c^\dagger_{m\downarrow})|0\rangle \label{p-skyrmion}$$ corresponding to the simplest skyrmion configuration ansatz with topological charge $k$. $D$ and $X$ operators are expressed as the spin summed operators: $$D= \sum_{\sigma_1 \sigma_2} D_{\sigma_1 \sigma_2}\,,\qquad
X= \sum_{\sigma_1 \sigma_2} X_{\sigma_1 \sigma_2}\,.$$ The operator with given spin can be evaluated. We give explicit representation for up-down spin configuration here. $$\begin{aligned}
D_{\uparrow \downarrow} &=& \sum_{l,m} |l \uparrow\rangle \otimes
|m \downarrow\rangle {\bar \alpha_l} {\bar  \gamma_m}\, \alpha_l
\gamma_m  \langle l\uparrow|\otimes \langle m \downarrow|
\nonumber\\
X_{\uparrow \downarrow} &=& \sum_{l,m} |l \uparrow\rangle \otimes
|m \downarrow\rangle {\bar \alpha_l} {\bar \gamma_m} \,
\alpha_{m+k} \gamma_{l- k} \langle m+k \uparrow|\otimes \langle l-
k   \downarrow|\end{aligned}$$ $\bar \alpha$ is the complex conjugate value of $\alpha$.

This $D$ and $X$ operators allow one to incorporate the $*$-product easily. For example, the direct term $D$ is written as $$  D= {\bar P_0} \,  P_0$$ where $$P_0 = \sum_{\sigma_1 \sigma_2} P_0^{\sigma_1 \sigma_2}\,.$$ For the up-down spin configuration we have $$\begin{aligned}
 P_0^{\uparrow \downarrow}  &=& \sum_{lm} (\alpha_l|l \uparrow  \rangle \langle l \uparrow| )
 \otimes ( \gamma_m \downarrow |m \rangle \langle m \downarrow|) \nonumber\\
&=& \sum_{lm} (|l \uparrow \rangle  \otimes |m\downarrow\rangle )
\alpha_l \gamma_m (\langle l \uparrow| \otimes \langle m
\downarrow |)\,,\end{aligned}$$ and $\bar P_0$ is the hermitian conjugate. This direct term is written in terms of the diagonal projection operator $|l \rangle
\langle l|$ only. The exchange term $X$, however, needs off-diagonal operator, $$X= \bar P_0 \, Q_k$$ where $$Q_k = \sum_{\sigma_1 \sigma_2} Q_k^{\sigma_1 \sigma_2}\,.$$ and $$Q_k^{\uparrow \downarrow} = \sum_{l,m} (|l \uparrow\rangle \otimes
|m \downarrow\rangle) \alpha_{m+k}  \gamma_{l- k}(\langle m+k
\uparrow|\otimes \langle l- k \downarrow|) .$$

Now it is clear that the H-F potential is written in terms of the $*$-product of the function corresponding $P$ and $Q$, $$\begin{aligned}
d(z_1 | z_2)  & =& \bar p_0 * p_0 \,(z_1 | z_2) \equiv e^{2
\bar\partial_1  \partial_1'}e^{2 \bar\partial_2  \partial_2'}p_0
(z_1 | z_2)~ p_0 (z_1' | z_2') \nonumber\\
 x(z_1 | z_2) & = & \bar p_0
* q_k \, (z_1 | z_2)
\equiv  e^{2 \bar\partial_1  \partial_1'}e^{2 \bar\partial_2
\partial_2'} p_0 (z_1 | z_2) ~q_k (z_1' | z_2')  \,.\end{aligned}$$ where $*$-product is generalized into 2 coordinates from Eq. (\[\*product\]).

Of course, $p_0 $ and $q_k $ are defined as $$\begin{aligned}
p_0 (z_1 | z_2)  & =& \langle z_1 |\otimes \langle z_2| \, P_0 \,
|z_1\rangle \otimes | z_2 \rangle
 \nonumber\\
q_k (z_1 | z_2)  & = & \langle z_1 |\otimes \langle z_2| \, Q_k \,
|z_1\rangle \otimes | z_2 \rangle \,.\end{aligned}$$ Each function contains the spin sum. For the spin up-down configurations, we have the following explicit form, $$\begin{aligned}
p_0 (z_1 \uparrow| z_2 \downarrow) &=& \sum_{l,m} \alpha_l
\gamma_m |\langle z_1 | l \rangle |^2 ~|\langle z_2 | m \rangle
|^2\nonumber\\
q_k (z_1 \uparrow| z_2 \downarrow) &=& \sum_{l,m} \alpha_{m+k}
\gamma_{l-k} \langle z_1 | l \rangle \langle z_2 | m \rangle
\langle m+k |z_1 \rangle \langle l-k |z_2 \rangle  .\end{aligned}$$

Now the H-F potential energy, Eq. (\[HF\]) is written as $${\cal  V} = 4\pi^2 V_0 \int {d^2 z}  \,{\bar p_0 } * ( p_0 - q_k
)\,(z| z)$$

The potential energy has to be semi-positive definite. So, the minimum of the H-F potential is obtained when $(p_0 -
q_k)(z\uparrow|z\downarrow)=0$. The solution of this condition is given as $$\frac{\alpha_{l+k}}{\gamma_l} \sqrt{\frac{l!}{(l+k)!}}
 ={\rm const}\,.
 \label{skyrmion-sol}$$ This is the same BPS condition for the one skyrmion given in Eq. (\[BPS1\]) from the BPS equation in Eq. (\[BPSequation\]) $$\Psi_{\downarrow}(z)\Psi_{\uparrow}(z)|\Phi\rangle=0 .\label{bpscondition}$$

Hence, the skyrmion saturates the energy bound and is the BPS soliton. From the non-commutative view point, the skyrmion is the non-commutative soliton. The solution has the topological charge $k$ if the coefficient satisfies the unitarity condition, $$\label{unitarity}
  |\alpha_{l+k}|^2 + |\gamma_l |^2 =1 .$$

Non-linear $\sigma$ model: Manybody vs Noncommutative Field approach
====================================================================

We derive the low-energy effective field theory for the $\nu=1$ quantum Hall system using the $|X\rangle$-basis obtained from the Landau gauge: $A_x=0$, $A_y=Bx$. The real space wavefunction in this gauge is given by $$\Phi_X ({\bf r}) = {1 \over \sqrt{ \pi^{1/2} L_y }} e^{i k_y y}
e^{-(x-X)^2 / 2},$$ where $X=k_y $ is the guiding center coordinate and $L_y$ the length of the ${\hat y}$-dimension. The $|X\rangle$-basis is most convenient in dealing with the $\hat x$-directional degrees of freedom, while the $|m\rangle$-basis is for the radial degrees of freedom. The Hamiltonian in the $|X\rangle$-basis is given by $${\hat V} = {1 \over 2} {\sum_{\sigma, \sigma^\prime}}
\sum_{X_1,X_2,X_3,X_4} V_{X_1 X_2 X_3 X_4} c^\dagger_{X_1 \sigma}
c^\dagger_{X_2 \sigma^\prime} c_{X_4 \sigma^\prime} c_{X_3 \sigma}$$ where $$V_{X_1 X_2 X_3 X_4} = \int d^2 z_1 \int d^2 z_2 V(|z_1 - z_2 | )
\Phi_{X_1}^* (z_1) \Phi_{X_2}^* ( z_2) \Phi_{X_4} (z_2)
\Phi_{X_3} (z_1).$$ We use the following variational wavefunction $|\Psi\rangle$ for the system@moon, $$|\Psi\rangle = \prod_X \biggl( c^\dagger_{X \uparrow} cos {\theta
(X) \over 2} + c^\dagger_{X \downarrow} sin {\theta (X) \over 2}
e^{i \phi (X)} \biggr) |0 \rangle .$$ Since the state $|\Psi\rangle$ couples only the same $X$-orbitals in the spin up and down states, it does not include charge fluctuations. The energy expectation value for the state $|\Psi\rangle$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal V}&=&\langle \Psi| {\hat V} | \Psi \rangle = {1 \over 2}
{\sum_{\sigma, \sigma^\prime}} \sum_{X_1,X_2,X_3,X_4} V_{X_1 X_2
X_3 X_4} \nonumber\\
&& \qquad \biggl[ \langle c^\dagger_{X_1 \sigma} c_{X_3 \sigma}
\rangle \langle c^\dagger_{X_2 \sigma^\prime} c_{X_4
\sigma^\prime} \rangle -\langle c^\dagger_{X_1 \sigma} c_{X_4
\sigma^\prime} \rangle \langle c^\dagger_{X_2 \sigma^\prime}
c_{X_3 \sigma} \rangle \biggr] .\end{aligned}$$ One can obtain the following energy functional ${\cal V}({\bf m})$ in terms of the local magnetization field ${\bf m} (X)$, $${\cal V} ({\bf m}) = {1 \over 2} \sum_{X_1,X_2} \biggl\{ V_D - {1
\over 2} V_E \biggl( 1 + {\bf m} (X_1)\cdot {\bf m} (X_2) \biggr)
\biggr\},$$ where $V_D$ stands for the direct interaction energy $V_{X_1 X_2
X_3 X_4}$ and $V_E$ the exchange energy $V_{X_1 X_2 X_3 X_4}$. We calculate $V_D$ and $V_E$ for the case of the delta-function interaction: $V (|z_1 - z_2 |) = V_0 \delta^2 (z_1-z_2)$, one can obtain $$V_D = V_E = V_0 \int d^2 z \left| \Phi_{X_1} (z )\right|^2 \left|
\Phi_{X_2} (z)\right|^2 = {V_0 \over \sqrt{2 \pi}} {1 \over L_y}
e^{-(X_1-X_2)^2 / 2 } .$$ Putting in $V_D$ and $V_E$, we obtain the following energy functional for the delta-function interaction $$E ({\bf m}) = {V_0 \over {4 \sqrt{2\pi}}} {1 \over L_y}
\sum_{X_1,X_2} e^{-{(X_1-X_2)^2 / 2}} \biggl( 1 - {\bf m}
(X_1)\cdot {\bf m} (X_2) \biggr).$$ As is clearly shown here, although we started with the <span>*local*</span> delta-function interaction, our final energy functional becomes <span>*non-local*</span>, which is due to the non-trivial dynamics at the LLL space.

Assuming that the magnetization ${\bf m} (X)$ varies smoothly over the magnetic length $\ell$, one can make a gradient expansion and obtain $${\cal V} ({\bf m}) \approx {V_0 \over {32\pi^2}} L_y \int d X
\biggl( {{d {\bf m}} \over {d X}} \biggr)^2.$$ Extending the above result to include the two-dimensional spin fluctuations, we finally obtain the following $O(3)$ non-linear $\sigma$ model@Sondhi [@moon] $${\cal V} ({\bf m}) \approx {1 \over 2} \rho_s \int d {\bf r}
\left( \nabla {\bf m} \right)^2 ,$$ where the spin stiffness $\rho_s$ is given by $V_0/(16\pi^2)$. The topological excitation of the non-linear $\sigma$ model is known to be skyrmion nathanhardy@example.com. In section 3, we described the microscopic skyrmion ansatz using the angular momentum basis $|m\rangle$ and showed that they are the <span>*exact*</span> BPS solitons of the system in the case of the <span>*local*</span> delta-function interaction.

The above effective nonlinear $\sigma$ model can be obtained from the noncommutative field theory. Suppose most of the spins are down and small perturbation for the up spins around the trivial vacuum: $\alpha_l <<1$, and $\gamma_m \cong 1$ for $k=0$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
p_0\, (z_1\uparrow | z_2 \downarrow ) &\cong&  {1 \over  2 \pi}
\sum_l a_l |\langle z_1 | l \rangle |^2 \nonumber\\
q_0\, (z_1\uparrow | z_2 \downarrow ) &\cong& \sum_{l,m} a_m
 \langle z_1 |l \rangle  \langle z_2 |m \rangle \langle m | z_1 \rangle
 \langle l | z_2 \rangle\,.\end{aligned}$$ $p_0$ is the function of $z_1$ only and $$\partial_1 q_0(z_1 \uparrow| z_2 \downarrow) |_{z_1 = z_2 =z} =0$$ since $$\begin{aligned}
&&
\partial_1 q_0 (z_1\uparrow | z_2 \downarrow )|_{z_1 = z_2 }
= \sum_{l,m} a_m \partial(
 \langle z |l \rangle  \langle m | z )\rangle
 \langle z |m \rangle   \langle l | z \rangle
  \nonumber\\
&&\qquad =\sum_{l,m} a_m (\partial
 \langle z |l \rangle \langle m | z \rangle
  \langle z |m \rangle\langle l | z \rangle  )
  -\sum_{l,m} a_m
 \langle z |l \rangle \langle m | z \rangle
 \partial   ( \langle z |m \rangle \langle l | z \rangle)
  \nonumber\\
&&\qquad = \sum_{m} {a_m \over 2 \pi}
 \partial (\langle z |m \rangle \langle m | z \rangle    )
  -\sum_{l,m} a_m
 \langle z |l \rangle \langle m | z \rangle
 (- {\bar z \over 2} + {m \over 2})\langle z |m \rangle
 \langle l | z \rangle
  \nonumber\\
&&\qquad = \sum_{m} {a_m \over 2 \pi}
\partial ( \langle m | z \rangle    \langle z |m \rangle)
  -\sum_{l,m} a_m
 \langle z |l \rangle \langle l | z \rangle
 \partial (\langle z |m \rangle \langle m | z \rangle   )
  \nonumber\\
&&\qquad = 0\,,\end{aligned}$$ with $\sum_l \langle z| l \rangle \langle l |z \rangle = \langle
z| z \rangle = 1 / (2 \pi)$. Now, the H-F density correlation becomes, $$\begin{aligned}
\rho (z | z ) &= &4\pi^2 {\bar p_0} * (p_0 - q_0) (z_1 | z_2)
 |_{z_1 = z_2 =z} \nonumber \\
 &=& 4\pi^2 e^{2\bar\partial_{1}\partial_1'}
 e^{2\bar\partial_{2}\partial_2'} {\bar p_0} (z_1 | z_2)
 (p_0 - q_0)(z_1' | z_2') |_{z_1 = z_2 =z_1' = z_2'=z} \nonumber \\
 & \cong & 8\pi^2 (\bar\partial \bar p_0^{\,\uparrow\downarrow } )
  (\partial p_0^{\,\uparrow\downarrow } )\end{aligned}$$ where we use $p_0 (z| z) = q_0 (z| z) $ and the derivative expansion for the long-wave length scale. In addition, the magnetization $m_+ (z) \equiv  2 \langle \Psi^+ _{\uparrow } (z)
\Psi_{\downarrow} (z) \rangle $ is expressed as $$\label{m}
m_+ (z) \equiv  2 \langle \Psi^+ _{\uparrow } (z)
\Psi_{\downarrow} (z) \rangle \cong 4\pi \sum_l  a_l |\langle z |
l \rangle |^2  \equiv 8\pi^2 p_0 \,(z | z )\,.$$ Therefore, we have the effective potential for the magnon field, $${\cal V} \cong  {V_0  \over 8\pi^2} \int d^2 z
 (\bar \partial  m_+ ~ {\partial }  m_-  ) \,.
 $$ If one considers all the spin configurations, one has the nonlinear $\sigma$ model for the effective action, $${\cal V} \cong { \rho_s \over  2} \int d {\bf r} ~4 \left(\bar
\partial {\bf m} \cdot {\partial }{\bf m} \right)= { \rho_s \over 2}
\int d {\bf r} \left(\nabla {\bf m}\right)^2 \, ,$$ with the spin stiffness $\rho_s = { V_0/ ( 16 \pi^2)} $ and the magnetization vector ${\bf m}$ normalized to $1$: $|{\bf m}|=1$ .

Summary and Discussions
=======================

We considered the quantum Hall system near the filling factor $\nu=1$ with the negligible Zeeman splitting energy. This system possesses skyrmion collective excitations when projected to the LLL with the Coulomb repulsion among electrons. Since its presence is insensitive to the exact form of the potential, we replace the Coulomb interaction with the delta-function interaction.

We obtain the multi-skyrmion solutions, which are shown to be the exact BPS solitons. The system of skyrmions with total topolocal charge $k$ has $4k+2$ moduli parameters. Two parameters correspond to the global background spin orientation. For the well separated skyrmions, four parameters can be associated to each skyrmion: two for the location, one for the size, and one for the $U(1)$ orientation. This is consistent with the fact that they are BPS states.

The quantum fluctuation of the many electrons at LLL can be described with the nonlinear $\sigma$ model, which is derived using the traditional many-body approach. On the other hand, since the system is projected to the LLL, one can study the system using the noncommutative field theory approach. After writing the Hamiltonian in terms of the noncommutative field theories, we explicitly solve the BPS conditions for the excitation spectrum. We also derive the low energy effective nonlinear $\sigma$ model action from the Hamiltonian through the $*$-product representation. We have seen that this noncommutative field approach gives clear insight into the property of the projection as well as simplicity of the derivation and therefore, becomes complementary to the many body approach. The noncommutative field theory provides another natural and powerful framework in dealing with the physics of the LLL states. Other physical properties of the LLL system based on this language are under investigation.

<span>**Acknowledgment**</span> BHL and CR would like to thank YVRC(Yonsei Visiting Research Center) for the warm hospitality where a part of this work has been carried out. We acknowledge financial support from the Basic Research Program of the Korea Science and Engineering Foundation Grant No. 1999-2-112-001-5. The work of BHL is supported in part by BK21 Project No. D-0055.

<span>99</span>

N. Seiberg and E. Witten, JHEP 9909, 032 (1999). M.M. Sheikh-Jabbari, Super Yang-Mills Theory on Noncommutative Torus from Open Strings Interactions, hep-th/9810179.

See for example, B.-H. Lee, K. Lee, and H. S. Yang, Phys.Lett. B 498, 277 (2001); D. Bak, Exact Solutions of Multi-Vortices and False Vacuum Bubbles in Noncommutative Abelian Higgs Theories, hep-th/0008204; D. Bak, K. Lee, and J.-H. Park, Noncommutative Vortex Solitons, hep-th/0011099; G.S. Lozano , E.F. Moreno, F.A. Schaposnik, JHEP 0102, 036 (2001); G.S. Lozano, E.F. Moreno, F.A. Schaposnik, Phys. Lett. B 504, 117 (2001); A. Khare, and M. B. Paranjape, JHEP 0104, 002 (2001); J. Harvey, P. Kraus, and F. Larsen, JHEP 0012 (2000) 024; D. Gross and N. Nekrasov, JHEP 0103, 044 (2001) and work cited therein.

R. Gopakumar, S. Minwalla, and A. Strominger, Noncommutative Solitons, hep-th/0003160

See, for examples, S. M. Girvin and T. Jach, Phys. Rev. B 29, 5617 (1984); G. V. Dunne, R. Jackiw, and C.A. Trugenberger, Phys. Rev. D 41, 661 (1990); N. Read, Phys. Rev. B58, 16262 (1998).

D. Bigatti and L. Susskind, Magnetic fields, branes and noncommutative geometry, hep-th/9908056

S. S. Gubser and M. Rangamani, D-brane Dynamics and the Quantum Hall Effect, hep-th/0012155.

L. Susskind, The Quantum Hall Fluid and Non-commutative Chern Simons Theory, hep-th/0101029. Y.S. Myung and H.W. Lee, Noncommutative spacetime and the fractional quantum Hall effect, hep-th/9911031.

V. Pasquier, Skyrmions in the Quantum Hall effect and noncommutative solitons, hep-th/0007176

V. Pasquier, An exact correspondence between Quantum Hall Skyrmions and non linear $\sigma$-models, hep-th/0012207.

K. Moon, H. Mori, Kun Yang, S.M. Girvin, A.H. MacDonald, L. Zheng, D. Yoshioka, and Shou-Cheng Zhang, Phys. Rev. B <span>**51**</span>, 5138 (1995); K. Moon, J. Korean Phys. Soc. <span>**35**</span>, S35 (1999). S. L. Sondhi, A. Karlhede, S.A. Kivelson, and E.H. Lezayi, Phys. Rev. B <span>**47**</span>, 16419 (1993).

R. Rajaraman, <span>*Solitons and Instantons*</span>, North Hollands, Amsterdam (1982).

A.H.MacDonald, H.A. Fertig, and L. Brey, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 2153 (1996).

K. Moon and K. Mullen, Phys. Rev. B <span>**57**</span>, 14833 (1998).

{'source': 'arXiv_out/hep-th0105127'}