2
$\begingroup$

There is an issue that I have with the argument given in “Topological Degeneracy of non-Abelian States for Dummies” http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0607743 , regarding the ground state degeneracy of the Pfaffian state on a torus: This is They argue that adiabatic pairwise annihilation of quasiparticles around the $x$-direction (implemented by $T_x$) should be equivalent to inserting half a flux quantum into the y-direction “hole” of the torus, i.e.

$$T_x=F_y^2.$$

Explicitly, this is described in the following paragraph, on page 9, Section 4: Consistency between non-Abelian statistics and charge fractionalization:

enter image description here

The issue I have with this is that the magnetic field in a vortex is localized at a point, and is not like the uniform field described by "insertion of half a flux quantum into a hole", and so the authors still have to prove that a quasiparticle encircling the appropriate fundamental cycle of the torus still picks up the same Aharonov Bohm phase, despite the fact that the magnetic fields are different in each case.

Moreover, I do not believe that it is possible for for half a flux quantum to exist: then the Chern number of the electromagnetic $U(1)$-bundle would then be 1/2, not an integer, which violates mathematics!!!

What's going on here?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Your last objection has a well-known resolution: all that means is that fractional value of Hall conductance (the "Chern number") requires ground state degeneracy. So when you adiabatically insert $2\pi$ $U(1)$ flux, you actually move to a different ground state. No mathematics is violated. $\endgroup$ – Meng Cheng Dec 9 '15 at 1:27
  • $\begingroup$ "actually move to a different ground state". - Could you elaborate on that point? Also, we're talking about half a flux-quantum, so that would be $\pi$ flux. $\endgroup$ – David Roberts Dec 9 '15 at 1:58
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, I was thinking about a unit flux quanta. Please discard my previous comment since it was probably irrelevant in this context. $\endgroup$ – Meng Cheng Dec 9 '15 at 2:18
2
$\begingroup$

I'll try to answer the last question, which is of course closely related to the first one (in bold font).

The existence of half flux quanta is special to Moore-Read state (the paper cited in the OP called it the Pfaffian state). Let us take the simplest example, the Moore-Read state at $\nu=1/2$, corresponding to $M=1$ in the paper. The quasiparticles are the following: the trivial electrons, a charge-$e/2$ quasiparticle, a neutral fermion, and charge-$\pm e/4$ non-Abelian quasiparticle (often called the quasiholes, and the paper called them the vortex/anti-vortex). It is useful to use the composite fermion picture, where the composite fermion is one electron plus two units of flux quanta, and the Moore-Read state can be thought of as the $p+ip$ superconductor of the composite fermions. Of course there is also the charge sector, which is very important in this discussion. More formally, we can construct the Moore-Read state by a parton approach, write the electron operator $c$ as $c=\psi b$ where $\psi$ is the neutral composite fermion and $b$ is a charge-$e$ boson. We then put $\psi$ fermions into a $p+ip$ superconductor, and $b$ into a $\nu=1/2$ bosonic Laughlin state. It is not hard to see that the resulting wavefunction is exactly the same as the Moore-Read state. The charge-$e/4$ quasiparticle is then the vortex for the composite fermion.

Now we can understand the effect of external U(1) flux insertion. Inserting a $2\pi$ U(1) flux nucleates the Abelian charge-$e/2$ quasiparticle, as one would expect for a $\nu=1/2$ bosonic Laughlin state. Now the question is whether a $\pi$ U(1) flux is allowed. The reason that usually we do not allow such non-unit fluxes is because they introduce a "branch cut" into the wavefunction of electrons, so can not represent a quasi-particle type excitation of the system, which is the objection raised by the OP near the end (although phrased differently). However, what happens in the Moore-Read state is that when a $\pi$ U(1) flux is inserted, the $b$ boson sees it as a $\pi$ flux, but at the same time a vortex in the $p+ip$ supercondutor is also created, so the $\psi$ fermion also sees a $\pi$ flux (from the vortex). The electron thus sees no effectively no flux, so there is no "branch cut". Therefore, half flux quanta insertion creates a charge-$e/4$ "vortex" quasiparticle.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.