text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Translational motion of the 2D topological excitations, considered as a particle-like object, is a problem of enhanced importance both in theoretical and practical sense. Classical approach implies making use of phenomenological equations of motion. A variational approach is one of the most attractive methods to study an appropriate quantum problem. The variational wave function of collective motions, like translations, rotations and oscillations, was initially proposed by Hill and Wheeler  to be

$$\mathrm{\Psi }\left(\left[𝐫\right]\right)=d^2𝐑f\left(𝐑\right)\mathrm{\Psi }_𝐑\left(\left[𝐫\right]\right),$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Psi }_𝐑\left(\left[𝐫\right]\right)`$ is a particle-like wave function for the topological excitation centered at point $`𝐑=(R,\mathrm{\Theta })`$, $`f\left(𝐑\right)`$ a weighting function, and $`\left[𝐫\right]`$ is a set of particle coordinates. For continuous 2D media the angular dependence of the weighting function follows immediately from the cylindrical symmetry of the system, so,

$$f\left(𝐑\right)=f_l\left(R\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(il\mathrm{\Theta }\right)$$

with $`l`$ being the angular momentum. By varying the weighting function to minimize the expectation value of the Hamiltonian

$$E=\mathrm{\Psi }\left(\left[𝐫\right]\right)\left|\widehat{H}\right|\mathrm{\Psi }\left(\left[𝐫\right]\right),$$

one obtains an integral equation for $`f\left(𝐑\right)`$,

$$d^2𝐑^{}K(𝐑^{},𝐑)f\left(𝐑^{}\right)=0,$$
(2)
where the kernel is

$$K(𝐑^{},𝐑)=\mathrm{\Psi }_𝐑^{}\left(\left[𝐫\right]\right)\left|\widehat{H}E\right|\mathrm{\Psi }_𝐑\left(\left[𝐫\right]\right)=H(𝐑^{},𝐑)ES(𝐑^{},𝐑),$$
(3)
where we have made use of matrix elements of Hamiltonian, and overlap integral $`S(𝐑^{},𝐑)`$. The kernel $`K(𝐑^{},𝐑)`$ may be considered as an effective transfer (hopping) integral for quasiparticle transfer between $`𝐑^{}`$ and $`𝐑`$ sites.

It should be noted however that full realization of above mentioned scheme (2,3) for the real topological defect on the lattice is a difficult task as the lattice has no authentic rotational symmetry unlikely the conventional case of the vortex in the superfluid . Obviously, the first step to treat this problem implies using continual approximation for describing soliton in the lattice.

Below we calculate quantity $`K(𝐑^{},𝐑)`$ for quantized skyrmion being peculiar topological defect described in the framework of the coherent state approximation and use continual approximation to treat skyrmion motion in a discrete lattice.

Skyrmions are general static solutions of 2D Heisenberg ferromagnet with isotropic spin-Hamiltonian

$$H=J\mathrm{\Sigma }_{i,b}𝐒_i𝐒_{i+b},$$
(4)
obtained by Belavin and Polyakov  from classical nonlinear sigma model. A renewed interest to these unconventional spin textures is stimulated by high-$`T_c`$ problem in doped quasi-2D-cuprates and quantum Hall effect.

The skyrmion spin texture consists of a vortex-like arrangement of the in-plane components of spin with the $`z`$-component reversed in the centre of the skyrmion and gradually increasing to match the homogeneous background at infinity. The spin distribution within classical skyrmion is given as follows

$$S_x=\frac{2r\lambda }{r^2+\lambda ^2}\mathrm{cos}\phi ,S_y=\frac{2r\lambda }{r^2+\lambda ^2}\mathrm{sin}\phi ,S_z=\frac{r^2\lambda ^2}{r^2+\lambda ^2}.$$
(5)
In terms of the stereographic variables the skyrmion with radius $`\lambda `$ and phase $`\phi _0`$ centered at a point $`z_0`$ is identified with spin distribution $`w\left(z\right)=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{zz_0}`$, where $`z=x+iy=re^{i\phi }`$ is a point in the complex plane, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\lambda e^{i\theta }`$, and characterized by three modes: translational, or positional $`z_0`$-mode, ”rotational” $`\theta `$-mode and ”dilatational” $`\lambda `$-mode. Each of them corresponds to certain symmetry of the classical skyrmion configuration. For example, $`\theta `$-mode corresponds to combination of rotational symmetry and internal $`U\left(1\right)`$ transformation.

The simplest wave function of the quantum spin system, which corresponds to classical skyrmion, is a product of spin coherent states . In case of spin $`s=\frac{1}{2}`$

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{sk}\left(0\right)=\underset{i}{}\left[\mathrm{cos}\frac{\theta _i}{2}e^{i\frac{\phi _i}{2}}+\mathrm{sin}\frac{\theta _i}{2}e^{i\frac{\phi _i}{2}}\right],$$
(6)
where $`\theta _i=\mathrm{arccos}\frac{r_i^2\lambda ^2}{r_i^2+\lambda ^2}`$. Coherent state implies a maximal equivalence to classical state with minimal uncertainty of spin components.

Classical skyrmions with different phases and radia have equal energy. Nevertheless, stationary state of quantum skyrmion is not a superposition of states with different phase and radius  and has a certain distinct value of $`\lambda `$. Fluctuations in the in-plane orientation and size $`\lambda `$ for quantum skyrmion are intimately connected; rotating a skyrmion changes its size. This result follows from the commutation relations of quantum angular momentum operators .

In our recent paper  it has been obtained an analytical expression for overlap integral of skyrmion states

$$S(𝐑_1,𝐑_2)=\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\pi S}{a^2}\left(R_{12}^24i\mathrm{\Delta }_{12}\right)\right],$$
(7)
if $`R_{12}<2\lambda `$ or

$$S(𝐑_1,𝐑_2)=\mathrm{exp}[\frac{\pi S}{a^2}(R_{12}^24i\mathrm{\Delta }_{12}$$

$$R_{12}\sqrt{R_{12}^24\lambda ^2}+2\lambda ^2ln\left(\frac{R_{12}+\sqrt{R_{12}^24\lambda ^2}}{R_{12}\sqrt{R_{12}^24\lambda ^2}}\right)],$$
(8)
if $`R_{12}>2\lambda `$. Here one introduces a quantity

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{12}=\frac{1}{2}R_1R_2\mathrm{sin}\left(\phi _1\phi _2\right)$$

being area of a sector skyrmion covers while moving in the plane, $`a`$ is a lattice parameter. Skyrmion, having wandered closed contour on the plane, acquires the phase $`4\pi \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_{12}}{a^2}`$, that is each spin lying inside the contour contributes $`4\pi `$ into the total phase of the skyrmion, so its motion appears to be likely the motion of a charged particle in magnetic field . Extending this analogy one may introduce the effective magnetic length $`d=\left(\frac{4\pi S}{a^2}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}`$. Note the dependence of the phase factor in the overlap integral on the origin of the vectors $`𝐑_1`$, $`𝐑_2`$. It should be noted that for large separation $`R_{12}\lambda `$ the $`R`$ dependence of the overlap integral obeys the power law

$$S(𝐑_1,𝐑_2)\left(\lambda /R_{12}\right)^p$$

with $`p=\left(\lambda /d\right)^2`$.

## 2 Hopping integral for stiff quantum skyrmion

One of the main goals of the paper is a calculation of the nondiagonal matrix element of the Hamiltonian (4)

$$H(𝐑_1,𝐑_2)=\mathrm{\Psi }_{𝐑_1}^{sk}\left(\left[𝐫\right]\right)\left|\widehat{H}\right|\mathrm{\Psi }_{𝐑_2}^{sk}\left(\left[𝐫\right]\right),$$

between the states of quantum skyrmions, located at points $`R_1`$ and $`R_2`$, respectively, or transfer integral, likely being the principal quantity defining the quasiparticle motion of this topological defect.

We use approximation of ”stiff” skyrmions, which takes no account of internal skyrmion quantum fluctuations and is closely related to classical limit. Making use of the coherent states (6) we write out the appropriate matrix element as follows:

$$H(𝐑_1,𝐑_2)=\frac{1}{2}JS_{12}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{i,b}\frac{\varsigma _i𝐒_i\varsigma _{i+b}\varsigma _{i+R_{12}}𝐒_{i+R_{12}}\varsigma _{i+b+R_{12}}}{\varsigma _i\varsigma _{i+b}\varsigma _{i+R_{12}}\varsigma _{i+b+R_{12}}}.$$
(9)
For the spin coherent states the following relations exist :

$$\varsigma S_z\mu =S\frac{\left(1\varsigma \overline{\mu }\right)\left(1+\varsigma \overline{\mu }\right)^{2S1}}{\left(1+\varsigma ^2\right)^S\left(1+\mu ^2\right)^S},$$

$$\varsigma S_+\mu =2S\frac{\overline{\mu }\left(1+\varsigma \overline{\mu }\right)^{2S1}}{\left(1+\varsigma ^2\right)^S\left(1+\mu ^2\right)^S},$$

$$\frac{\varsigma S_z\mu }{\varsigma \mu }=S\frac{1\varsigma \overline{\mu }}{1+\varsigma \overline{\mu }},$$
(10)
$$\frac{\varsigma S_+\mu }{\varsigma \mu }=2S\frac{\overline{\mu }}{1+\varsigma \overline{\mu }},\frac{\varsigma S_{}\mu }{\varsigma \mu }=2S\frac{\varsigma }{1+\varsigma \overline{\mu }}.$$

Taking account of the spin distribution in the skyrmion we write out the matrix element addressed as follows

$$H(𝐑_1,𝐑_2)=\frac{1}{2}JS^2S_{12}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{i,b}[[((\varsigma _iR_1)(\overline{\varsigma _i}\overline{R_2})\lambda ^2)((\varsigma _{i+b}R_1)\times $$

$$\times (\overline{\varsigma _{i+b}}\overline{R_2})\lambda ^2)+2\lambda ^2(\varsigma _{i+b}R_1)(\overline{\varsigma _i}\overline{R_2})+2\lambda ^2(\overline{\varsigma _{i+b}}\overline{R_2})(\varsigma _iR_1)]$$

$$\left[(\lambda ^2+(\varsigma _iR_1)(\overline{\varsigma _i}\overline{R_2}))(\lambda ^2+(\varsigma _{i+b}R_1)(\overline{\varsigma _{i+b}}\overline{R_2}))\right]^1].$$
(11)
Below we are going to find the limit of the right hand side when $`a0`$ with the constant $`a`$ of lattice assumed to be square. To do it one has to make expansion in lattice constant $`a`$ and to keep the three first terms, then to turn the sum into integral. The first (zero order in $`a`$) term in the expansion, as it is easy to see, is simply the ground state energy. The linear in $`a`$ term in the expansion is zero due to the inversion symmetry. So, one has to define the second order term for a given site $`i`$. Straightforward calculation gives for that second order term in $`a`$ in the matrix element for scalar product $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_b𝐒_i𝐒_{i+b}`$ the following result

$$\frac{8\lambda ^2}{\left(\lambda ^2+\left(\overline{\varsigma }\overline{R_2}\right)\left(\varsigma R_1\right)\right)^2}a^2.$$

While coming to the limit $`a0`$ the summation in (11) is replaced by the integration, and this term results in a nonvanishing contribution to the transfer integral:

$$H(𝐑_1,𝐑_2)=[E_0+4JS^2\lambda ^2_0^{\mathrm{}}rdr$$

$$_0^{2\pi }d\phi \frac{1}{\left(\lambda ^2+\left(re^{i\phi }\overline{R_2}\right)\left(re^{i\phi }R_1\right)\right)^2}\left]S\right(𝐑_1,𝐑_2),$$
(12)
where $`E_0`$ is a ground state energy of spin system. An angular integral is given by following expression

$$_0^{2\pi }𝑑\phi \frac{1}{\left(\lambda ^2+\left(re^{i\phi }\overline{R_2}\right)\left(re^{i\phi }R_1\right)\right)^2}=$$

$$\frac{zdz}{i\left(zx_1\right)^2\left(zx_2\right)^2\left(r\overline{R_2}\right)^2}=\frac{2\pi \left(x_1+x_2\right)}{\left(r\overline{R_2}\right)^2\left(x_1x_2\right)^3},$$

so the radial integral is

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{2\pi r\left(r^2+R_1\overline{R_2}+\lambda ^2\right)dr}{\sqrt{\left(\left(r^2+R_1\overline{R_2}+\lambda ^2\right)^24r^2R_1\overline{R_2}\right)^3}}=\frac{1}{\lambda ^2},$$

where

$$x_{1,2}(r,R_1,R_2)=\frac{\lambda ^2+r^2+R_1\overline{R_2}\pm K}{2r\overline{R_2}},$$

$$K(r,R_1,R_2)=\sqrt{\left(\lambda ^2+r^2+R_1\overline{R_2}\right)^24r^2R_1\overline{R_2}},$$

where the complex root has positive real part.

When $`R_{12}<2\lambda `$ we finally obtain for the transfer integral

$$H(𝐑_1,𝐑_2)=\left[E_0+4\pi JS^2\right]S(𝐑_1,𝐑_2).$$
(13)
As $`R_{12}=0`$ $`H(𝐑_1,𝐑_1)=\left[E_0+4\pi JS^2\right],`$ and this is the classical skyrmion energy. The structure of the transfer integral $`H(𝐑_1,𝐑_2)`$ is such, that its contribution to the effective hopping integral (3) $`K(𝐑_1,𝐑_2)`$ at $`R_{12}<2\lambda `$ is exactly compensated by the overlap contribution. Thus, effective hopping integral for the ”stiff” skyrmion is zero for distances $`R_{12}<2\lambda `$.

When $`R_{12}>2\lambda `$, the integral (12) contains two singular points and, respectively, it is ill-defined in that region. To avoid the contribution from these points and obtain result independent of choice of coordinates we calculate its principal value, that is remove the contribution of points, that lie inside the circles of small radius $`ϵ`$ with centers in singular points. To this end we divide the plane into two equal parts drawing the border between halfplanes at the middle of the line connecting two singular points. The value of integral (12) is twice the value of integral over halfplane. Integral (12) being represented as halfplane integral in coordinate system with center in singular point takes the form

$$H(𝐑_1,𝐑_2)=[E_0+8JS^2\lambda ^2_c^{\mathrm{}}rdr\times $$

$$\times _{\mathrm{arccos}\frac{c}{r}}^{2\pi \mathrm{arccos}\frac{c}{r}}d\phi \frac{1}{r^2\left(r+\left(\frac{R_{12}}{2}c\right)e^{i\phi }\left(\frac{R_{12}}{2}+c\right)e^{i\phi }\right)^2}+$$
(14)
$$+8JS^2\lambda ^2_0^crdr_0^{2\pi }d\phi \frac{1}{r^2\left(r+\left(\frac{R_{12}}{2}c\right)e^{i\phi }\left(\frac{R_{12}}{2}+c\right)e^{i\phi }\right)^2}\left]S\right(𝐑_1,𝐑_2),$$

where $`c=\sqrt{\frac{R_{12}^2}{4}\lambda ^2}`$ is a half-separation between singular points. Here we have restricted ourselves to the case of real $`𝐑_1,𝐑_2`$ to simplify calculations. It is easy to see that last term in (14) is zero as angular integral is zero no matter what the value of $`r`$ is. Then,

$$𝑑\phi \frac{1}{\left(r+\left(\frac{R_{12}}{2}c\right)e^{i\phi }\left(\frac{R_{12}}{2}+c\right)e^{i\phi }\right)^2}=$$
(15)
$$\frac{1}{i\left(r^2+4\lambda ^2\right)}\left[\frac{e^{i\phi }}{e^{i\phi }x_{}}\frac{e^{i\phi }}{e^{i\phi }x_+}\frac{x_{}+x_+}{x_{}x_+}\mathrm{ln}\frac{e^{i\phi }x_{}}{e^{i\phi }x_+}\right],$$

where

$$x_{+,}=\frac{r\pm \sqrt{r^2+4\lambda ^2}}{2\left(\frac{R_{12}}{2}+c\right)}.$$

As a result, we obtain the following radial integral

$$_c^{\mathrm{}}r𝑑r_{\mathrm{arccos}\frac{c}{r}}^{2\pi \mathrm{arccos}\frac{c}{r}}𝑑\phi \frac{1}{r^2\left(r+\left(\frac{R_{12}}{2}c\right)e^{i\phi }\left(\frac{R_{12}}{2}+c\right)e^{i\phi }\right)^2}=$$

$$_c^{\mathrm{}}dr\frac{2}{r\left(r^2+4\lambda ^2\right)}[\frac{r}{\sqrt{\left(r^2+4\lambda ^2\right)}}\times $$
(16)
$$\times \mathrm{arctan}\sqrt{\left(r^2+4\lambda ^2\right)\left(\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{1}{r^2}\right)}\frac{\sqrt{r^2c^2}\left(2\lambda ^2+r^2\right)2c}{4c^2\lambda ^2+r^2\left(r^2+4\lambda ^2\right)}]=0.$$

Thus, it appears that the effective hopping integral is nonzero in this regime and its value is simply proportional to the overlap integral.

So, the final result for effective hopping integral is

$$K(𝐑_1,𝐑_2)=4\pi S^2JS(𝐑_1,𝐑_2)\theta \left(R_{12}2\lambda \right),$$
(17)
where

$$\theta \left(R_{12}2\lambda \right)=\{\begin{array}{cc}1,\hfill & \text{if }R_{12}>2\lambda \hfill \\ 0,\hfill & \text{otherwise}\hfill \end{array},$$

and $`S(𝐑_1,𝐑_2)`$ is given by expressions (7), (8).

Thus, one might conclude that the skyrmion hopping is restricted by distances larger than $`2\lambda `$. The nonzero effective hopping integral for distances larger than $`2\lambda `$ allows to lower skyrmion energy by construction of appropriate combination of skyrmion states centered at different points of lattice and having definite value of angular moment. Energy of these states will depend on the value of the angular moment and on number of the levels as it is the case for the Landau levels in a magnetic field. Note also that transfer integral has the negative sign as must be the case.

The states considered have definite phase and radius. In fact phase and radius can not be treated separately as radius is determined by spin of the skyrmion and spin in turn is canonically conjugate to the phase. It is easy to show that states of definite phase and radius are not mixed by the Hamiltonian. This is related to the fact that we deal with the skyrmion of charge $`q=1`$, which has infinite spin. As the spin and phase operators do not commute, the spin must have infinite value for the phase to be definite. In the case of higher topological charges there would be mixing of the states with different phases and radius. The similar conclusions were drawn by Stern .

## 3 Orbital motion of skyrmions. Small and large orbital $`l`$-skyrmions

Making use of the above derived results we may exploit particular analogy between skyrmion and particle in zero Landau level to construct a subset of orthogonal states with definite value of orbital momentum, or $`l`$-skyrmions. Consider firstly the following orbital skyrmionic modes being linear combinations of single skyrmion states

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_l^{sk}\left(R\right)=_0^{2\pi }\mathrm{exp}\left(il\mathrm{\Theta }\right)\mathrm{\Psi }_{R\mathrm{exp}\left(i\mathrm{\Theta }\right)}^{sk}𝑑\mathrm{\Theta },$$
(18)
where $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{R\mathrm{exp}\left(i\mathrm{\Theta }\right)}^{sk}`$ is a single skyrmion state centered at the point $`Z=R\mathrm{exp}\left(i\mathrm{\Theta }\right).`$ Below, we will distinguish small and large $`l`$-skyrmions depending on whether $`R<\lambda `$ or $`R>\lambda `$, respectively.

### 3.1 Small orbital $`l`$-skyrmions

It seems, any two equally centered $`\mathrm{\Psi }_l^{sk}\left(R_1\right)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_l^{sk}\left(R_2\right)`$ states with commonly different $`R_1<\lambda `$ and $`R_2<\lambda `$, but the same orbital momentum $`l`$ are linearly dependent. Indeed, for small $`l`$-skyrmions one might use a simple Gaussian form (7) for the overlap integral of single skyrmionic states, so the corresponding unnormalized overlap integral is given by a rather simple analytical expression

$$S(R_1,R_2)=_0^{2\pi }\mathrm{exp}\left[il(\mathrm{\Theta }_1\mathrm{\Theta }_2)\right]\mathrm{exp}[\frac{1}{4d^2}(R_1^2+R_2^22R_1R_2$$

$$\mathrm{exp}[i(\mathrm{\Theta }_1\mathrm{\Theta }_2)])]d\mathrm{\Theta }_1d\mathrm{\Theta }_2=\frac{4\pi ^2}{l!}\mathrm{exp}[\frac{1}{4d^2}(R_1^2+R_2^2)\left]\right(\frac{R_1R_2}{2d^2})^l.$$
(19)
It is easy to see that after normalization the overlap integral for two $`l`$-skyrmions with different $`R_1`$ and $`R_2`$

$$\frac{S(R_1,R_2)}{\sqrt{S(R_1,R_1)S(R_2,R_2)}}=1$$

does not depend on $`R_1,R_2`$ at all, which means at least that the corresponding functions are not independent. So, these states are distinguished by a single quantum number $`l`$ which is an orbital momentum and are degenerate in energy in full analogy with a zero Landau level. It should be emphasized that for ”$`l`$-skyrmion” $`\mathrm{\Psi }_l^{sk}\left(R\right)`$ with $`R<\lambda `$ the orbital moment is restricted by non-negative values $`l0`$, due to the definite sign of the Berry phase in the overlap integral for single skyrmion. To describe a spatial distribution of a ”single skyrmionic (quasiparticle) density” for the orbital $`l`$-skyrmion $`\mathrm{\Psi }_l`$ one might use an overlap integral of the orbital state (18) with the simple skyrmion state in the point $`z=r\mathrm{exp}i\theta `$ which has a rather simple form for $`r<\lambda `$

$$S_{sk}^l(r,R)=_0^{2\pi }\mathrm{exp}\left[il\mathrm{\Theta }\right]\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{4d^2}\left(r^2+R^22rR\mathrm{exp}\left[i\left(\theta \mathrm{\Theta }\right)\right]\right)\right]𝑑\mathrm{\Theta }=$$

$$\frac{2\pi }{l!}\mathrm{exp}\left[il\theta \right]\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{4d^2}\left(r^2+R^2\right)\right]\left(\frac{rR}{2d^2}\right)^l,$$
(20)
that with account for normalization conditions gives the quantity

$$S_{sk}^l\left(r\right)=\frac{S_{sk}(r,R)}{\sqrt{S(R,R)}}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{l!}}\mathrm{exp}\left[il\theta \right]\left(\frac{r^2}{2d^2}\right)^l\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{r^2}{2d^2}\right],$$
(21)
which does not depend at all on $`R`$ value. This distribution function has maximum at $`r=r_l`$, where

$$\frac{2\pi Sr_l^2}{a^2}=l,$$
(22)
so, the orbital momentum $`l`$ defines the characteristic ”orbital area” $`\pi r_l^2`$ measured in terms of a ”flux quantum” $`\frac{a^2}{2S}`$. This relation looks like a specific quantization condition for the ”orbital area”. The $`r_l`$ value defined by expression (22) may be called as a characteristic ”internal” radius of the $`\mathrm{\Psi }_l\left(R\right)`$ orbital states which magnitude does not depend on $`R`$ value. One should note that for ”s-skyrmion” $`r_0=0`$ as it should be for typical quasiparticle orbital s-states.

Actually, the maximal value of orbital momentum for the small $`l`$-skyrmion is restricted by the size of the bare skyrmion and, in general, can not significantly exceed $`l_\lambda `$, because of the number of translational degrees of freedom is restricted by the ”skyrmionic area” $`\pi \lambda ^2`$. If we consider values of $`l`$ much larger than $`l_\lambda `$ we would obtain meaningless result for the spin distribution in the $`l`$-skyrmion because in this case continual approximation for the skyrmion overlap breakes down and expression (7) that neglects discretness effects is not adequate.

### 3.2 Quantum spin contraction for small radius $`l`$-skyrmions

Spin distribution in the puzzling ”$`l`$-skyrmionic” $`\mathrm{\Psi }_l\left(R\right)`$ states with small $`R<\lambda `$ can also be shown to be independent on radius $`R`$. Besides, the corresponding spin texture is characterized by a quantum spin contraction, that is the mean spin length is less than $`S`$. It can be calculated with making use of relations (10), so that we have for the spin averages

$$S_+\left(z\right)=\frac{1}{N}_0^{2\pi }\mathrm{exp}\left[il\left(\theta _1\theta _2\right)\right]\frac{\frac{\left(zz_1\right)}{\lambda }S_+\frac{\left(zz_2\right)}{\lambda }}{\frac{\left(zz_1\right)}{\lambda }\frac{\left(zz_2\right)}{\lambda }}S_{12}\left(z_1z_2\right)𝑑\theta _1𝑑\theta _2=$$

$$=\frac{1}{N}_0^{2\pi }\mathrm{exp}\left[il(\theta _1\theta _2)\right]S\frac{2\lambda \left(zr\mathrm{exp}\left(i\theta _1\right)\right)}{\lambda ^2+\left(zr\mathrm{exp}\left(i\theta _1\right)\right)\left(\overline{z}r\mathrm{exp}\left(i\theta _2\right)\right)}\times $$

$$\times \mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2d^2}\left(r^2r^2\mathrm{exp}\left[i\left(\theta _1\theta _2\right)\right]\right)\right]d\theta _1d\theta _2,$$
(23)
where $`z_1=r\mathrm{exp}i\theta _1,z_2=r\mathrm{exp}i\theta _2`$ are locations of distinct skyrmion states on the circle of radius $`r`$,

$$N=S(r,r)=\frac{\left(2\pi \right)^2}{l!}\left(\frac{r^2}{2d^2}\right)^l\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{r^2}{2d^2}\right]$$

is a normalization integral. Introducing complex variables $`\stackrel{´}{z}_1=\mathrm{exp}\left(i\theta _1\right),\stackrel{´}{z}_2=\mathrm{exp}\left(i\theta _2\right)`$ and taking integral in $`\stackrel{´}{z}_1`$, and then in $`\stackrel{´}{z}_2`$ we obtain

$$S_+\left(z\right)=\frac{1}{N}\stackrel{´}{z}_1^{l+1}\stackrel{´}{z}_2^{l+1}\frac{2\lambda \left(zr\stackrel{´}{z}_1\right)}{\lambda ^2+\left(zr\stackrel{´}{z}_1\right)\left(\overline{z}r\stackrel{´}{z}_2\right)}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2d^2}\left(r^2r^2\stackrel{´}{z}_1\stackrel{´}{z}_2\right)\right]𝑑\stackrel{´}{z}_1𝑑\stackrel{´}{z}_2$$
(24)
$$=\frac{1}{l!}\left(\frac{2d^2}{r^2}\right)^l\underset{\stackrel{´}{z}_20}{lim}\frac{d^l}{d\stackrel{´}{z}_2^l}\underset{\stackrel{´}{z}_10}{lim}\frac{d^l}{d\stackrel{´}{z}_1^l}\left[\frac{2\lambda \left(zr\stackrel{´}{z}_1\right)}{\lambda ^2+\left(zr\stackrel{´}{z}_1\right)\left(\overline{z}r\stackrel{´}{z}_2\right)}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{r^2}{2d^2}\stackrel{´}{z}_1\stackrel{´}{z}_2\right]\right].$$

This is an exact expression as integrals in (24) have no other poles but those of $`\left(l+1\right)`$-order in $`\stackrel{´}{z}_1=0`$ and $`\stackrel{´}{z}_2=0`$, as long as $`r<l.`$ For the $`S_z`$ we have a similar expression

$$S_z\left(z\right)=\frac{1}{l!}\left(\frac{2d^2}{r^2}\right)^l\underset{\stackrel{´}{z}_20}{lim}\frac{d^l}{d\stackrel{´}{z}_2^l}\underset{\stackrel{´}{z}_10}{lim}\frac{d^l}{d\stackrel{´}{z}_1^l}\left[\frac{\lambda ^2\left(zr\stackrel{´}{z}_1\right)\left(\overline{z}r\stackrel{´}{z}_2\right)}{\lambda ^2+\left(zr\stackrel{´}{z}_1\right)\left(\overline{z}r\stackrel{´}{z}_2\right)}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2d^2}r^2\stackrel{´}{z}_1\stackrel{´}{z}_2\right]\right].$$
(25)
Surprisingly, for the case $`l=0`$ we obtain the same spin distribution as in the simple single skyrmion state. In other words, in the framework of a classical approach the s-skyrmion is equivalent to a single skyrmion. For the ”p-skyrmion” with $`l=1`$ the straightforward calculation gives

$$S_+\left(z\right)=\frac{2\lambda z}{\lambda ^2+z\overline{z}}\frac{8\lambda d^2z}{\left(\lambda ^2+z\overline{z}\right)^2}+\frac{8\lambda d^2z^2\overline{z}}{\left(\lambda ^2+z\overline{z}\right)^3}=\frac{2\lambda z}{\lambda ^2+z\overline{z}}\left[1\frac{4d^2\lambda ^2}{\left(\lambda ^2+z\overline{z}\right)^2}\right]$$

$$S_z\left(z\right)=\frac{\lambda ^2z\overline{z}}{\lambda ^2+z\overline{z}}\left[1\frac{4d^2\lambda ^2}{\left(\lambda ^2+z\overline{z}\right)^2}\right],$$
(26)
where all values are measured in lattice constant. Here, we deal with a spin length contraction, compared with the case of classical skyrmion, specified by an universal function of skyrmion radius and $`r=z`$

$$F(\lambda ,r)=\left[1\frac{4d^2\lambda ^2}{\left(\lambda ^2+z\overline{z}\right)^2}\right].$$

Increasing the skyrmion radius entails decreasing the spin contraction. Minimal spin contraction takes place for large $`r`$’s and $`\lambda `$’s, while the maximal spin contraction does in the center of the spin texture for small $`\lambda `$’s. Interestingly, that for small skyrmion with $`\lambda =2d`$ the effective spin length in the core of the orbital $`p`$-skyrmion turns to zero: $`S\left(r=0\right)=0`$. However, as it is easy to see for very small bare skyrmions with $`\lambda d`$ the expression (26) leads to unphysical results. Indeed, the continuous approximation used above appears to be irrelevant for small skyrmions with radius $`\lambda `$ less than the effective magnetic length $`d`$.

The case $`l>1`$ can not be represented in the simple form like (26), however, with increase of $`l`$ the value of spin contraction in the center of spin distribution also increases. It should be noted, that for the orbital skyrmions with $`l=l_\lambda =\frac{2\pi \lambda ^2S}{a^2}=\frac{\lambda ^2}{2d^2}`$ (which is just a ratio of ”skyrmionic area” $`\pi \lambda ^2`$ to the area corresponding to the quantum of flux $`\frac{a^2}{2S}`$), the mean spin length in the center of spin distribution turns to zero, that is the spin contraction appears to be maximal. This is due to the fact that at $`l=l_\lambda `$ the characteristic internal radius $`r_{l=l_\lambda }`$ of the $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{l_\lambda }`$ orbital skyrmion defined by expression (22) coincides with skyrmion radius $`\lambda `$, so in the $`l_\lambda `$-skyrmion core we deal with a superposition of vectors with zero $`z`$-projection and all possible phases.

### 3.3 Large radius orbital skyrmions

Above we addressed to the particular type of the small orbital $`l`$-skyrmion with bare radius $`R<\lambda `$. Unfortunately, for large $`l`$ strongly exceeding $`l_\lambda `$ continual approximation breakes down so we can not use expressions (24,25) to calculate spin distribution in the $`l`$-skyrmions with large effective radius. But this problem may be solved by taking bare radius $`R`$ in the $`l`$-skyrmion equal to corresponding effective radius $`r_l=\frac{la^2}{2\pi S}`$. However, in this case we cannot make use of advantages provided by a simple Gaussian form for the overlap integral of single skyrmionic states available only for $`R_{12}<2\lambda `$ (see (7)). The orbital motion with large bare radius acquires some unconventional properties compared to the case of ”small orbits”. Spin distribution in these states can be well approximated by the following expressions

$$S_z\left(z\right)=1+\frac{2\lambda ^2}{\sqrt{\left(\lambda ^2+z\overline{z}+R^2\right)^24z\overline{z}R^2}},$$
(27)
$$S_+\left(z\right)=\frac{\lambda }{\overline{z}}\left(1+\frac{z\overline{z}\lambda ^2R^2}{\sqrt{\left(\lambda ^2+z\overline{z}+R^2\right)^24z\overline{z}R^2}}\right).$$
(28)
This expressions can be easily obtained if one neglects overlap of skyrmions in different points at all. Here, R equals to $`r_l=\frac{la^2}{2\pi S}`$ as was explained before. Numerical calculations show that if we take account of the skyrmion overlap the effective radius of the state with bare radius $`R`$ may be changed but orbital momentum can not strongly deviate from $`\frac{2\pi SR^2}{a^2}`$ because otherwise discretness effects become again significant. Expression (27) shows that maximal spin contraction occurs not in the origin as is the case for small skyrmions but close to the points with $`z=R.`$

Strictly speaking, the correct description of large skyrmion implies that one has keep both bare radius $`R`$ and orbital momentum $`l`$ to characterize it because matrix element of the Hamiltonian and overlap integral are nontrivial when $`R_{12}>\lambda `$. But for large skyrmion radia such a description is redundant at least when we are interested in the properties of the zero Landau level only. The corresponding effects would be negligible.

As to the energy of these states its difference from the classical skyrmion energy is negligibe for large skyrmion radia so both large and small skyrmions may be said to constitute zero Landau level of skyrmion motion. In principle, it is possible to obtain higher Landau levels but we think it requres detailed account of discretness effects and is beyond the scope of this paper. The calculation of the fine structure of the skyrmion energy due to translational effects is prevented by discretness effects in the framework of the present continual approximation since it does not allow to have arbitrary values of bare radius $`R`$ for a given value of $`l`$ so one can not realize variational procedure (2,3) similarly to the case of a vortex in superfluid .

Both types of orbital skyrmions represent very interesting objects for further investigations.

## 4 Conclusions

Making use of the coherent state approximation allows to obtain an analytical form for an effective hopping integral for single stiff Belavin-Polyakov skyrmion in 2D isotropic ferromagnet. It appears, the skyrmion hopping is restricted by distances larger than its effective diameter, thus resulting in a very unusual quasiparticle properties. We introduce two types of orbital skyrmionic modes, the small and large $`l`$-skyrmions, respectively. For the former it is found both the spatial distribution of a single skyrmionic density, and the mean spin density distribution. The small $`l`$-skyrmions with nonzero orbital momentum are characterized by a strong quantum spin contraction effect. Translational symmetry of the Heisenberg Hamiltonian and topological Berry phase in overlap integral implies that there exists highly degenerate set of skyrmion states in analogy with a zero Landau level. Based on the calculated expression for the transfer integral of the skyrmion we confirm existence of this highly degenerate set .

It should be emphasized that the energy of the above addressed quantum small $`l`$-skyrmions with bare radius $`R<\lambda `$ is always equal to the classical single skyrmion energy independently both of $`R`$ and $`l`$ value. However, by forming the appropriate combinations of single skyrmion states centered at different space points with separation $`R_{12}2\lambda `$ the energy of the classical state can be lowered. Addressing for example the combinations of two different states with separation between them exceeding $`2\lambda `$ we obtain usual bonding and antibonding states. Energy of such a bonding state is

$$\frac{4S^2J\pi }{1S_{12}\left(R\right)}$$

and has a minimum at $`R_{12}=2\lambda `$. This implies that skyrmion states prefer to be separated a distance $`2\lambda `$ from each other to lower the energy. Naturally, this effect will lower the energy of the orbital skyrmions with rather large bare radius $`R>\lambda `$ as compared to the energy of classical skyrmion, but for large skyrmion radia $`\lambda `$ this lowering is obviously negligible. Thus we may say that both large and small $`l`$-skyrmions form unified zero Landau level.

The interaction of orbital skyrmions having the same orbital momentum but different bare radius will result in a complex skyrmionic energy spectrum, which analysis is a challenge for a further study. However, continual approximation used here is inadequate for calculation of that spectrum because real lattice on which skyrmion moves has no true rotational symmetry.

A further elaboration of the quasiparticle approach to skyrmions implies a detailed description of the internal structure of the orbital skyrmions without any constraint on its bare radius, and realization of variational procedure . An appropriate work is in progress.

The research described in this publication was made possible in part by Award No.REC-005 of the U.S. Civilian Research & Development Foundation for the Independent States of the Former Soviet Union (CRDF). The authors acknowledge a partial support from the Russian Ministry of Education, grant # 97-0-7.3-130. We acknowledge stimulating discussions with G. Volovik and J. M. Tang.


format: text

text:
# 1 Renormalized correlator 𝐶_𝑅(𝑡) () in the 0⁺ and 2⁺ glueball channel, respectively, obtained from full 𝑆𝑈(2) configurations.

UNITU-THEP-13/2000 DRAFT August 28, 2000

Vortex dominance of the $`0^+`$ and $`2^+`$ glueball mass

in $`SU(2)`$ lattice gauge theory

Kurt Langfeld, Alexandra Schäfke

Institut für Theoretische Physik, Universität Tübingen

D–72076 Tübingen, Germany

## Abstract

The $`c`$-vortex ensembles are constructed by means of the recently proposed cooling method which gradually removes the $`SU(2)/Z_2`$ coset fields from the $`SU(2)`$ lattice configurations and which thus reveals the $`Z_2`$ vortex vacuum texture. Using Teper’s blocking method, the screening masses of the $`0^+`$ and the $`2^+`$ glueball is calculated from these vortex ensembles and compared with the masses obtained from full configurations. The masses of either case agree within the achieved numerical accuracy of 10%. As a byproduct, we find that the overlaps of the Teper operators with the glueball wavefunctions are significantly larger in the case of the $`c`$-vortex ensembles.

> Supported in part by Graduiertenkolleg Hadronen und Kerne.
>
> PACS: 11.15.Ha 12.38.Aw
>
> keywords: confinement, vortex dominance, glueball mass, SU(2) lattice gauge theory.

Introduction. The idea that the center part of the $`SU(N)`$ gauge configurations are important for the confinement of quarks dates back to the late seventies . Indeed, the proposal that the vortex free energy serves as an order parameter for quark (de-)confinement was recently confirmed in the case of a $`SU(2)`$ gauge group by a large scale lattice simulation . Subsequently, Mach and collaborators explicitly constructed a vortex signature of the Yang-Mills vacuum from gauge invariant variables . It was observed at that time that random fluctuations of the vortex structure disorders the Wilson loop and, hence, provides quark confinement. With the increase of the computer performance in the mid eighties, many research efforts were devoted to substantiate this idea on a quantitative level . One finds that projecting the full lattice configurations onto its vortex content reproduces the string tension of the static quark anti–quark potential. Recently, it was pointed out that not only the asymptotic behavior of the potential but also the short range part which is due to gluon exchange is reproduced if the plaquette is used for a definition of the vortex ensemble . Moreover, the properties of the vortices arising from the plaquette projection technique strongly depend on the size of the lattice spacing thus rendering a continuum interpretation of the latter vortices cumbersome .

A significant upturn of the vortex picture of quark confinement occurred with the construction of the $`p`$-vortices which are defined after adopting the so-called center gauge  by projecting the gauge fixed link variables onto center elements . The fact that Yang-Mills lattice configurations which were reduced to their $`p`$-vortex content reproduce the string tension is often referred to as center dominance of the string tension. Moreover, it was observed that the $`p`$-vortices are sensible degrees of freedom in the continuum limit : the (area) density of the $`p`$-vortices as well as their binary interactions extrapolate to the continuum. The $`p`$-vortex picture of the Yang-Mills ground state also provides an appealing explanation of the de-confinement phase transition at finite temperatures .

It was pointed out that the center gauge fixing which is prior to identify the physical vortex structure might be plagued by a so-called practical Gribov problem . In addition, it was observed that the vortex properties are quite sensitive to the finite size of the lattice volume . For avoiding the practical Gribov and related problems, a gauge invariant definition of the vortex vacuum texture was achieved by employing a new self-restricted cooling procedure which diminishes the coset fields while leaving the center degrees of freedom un-changed . For rating the phenomenological importance of these, say, $`c`$-vortices, center dominance of the string tension was verified. In addition, the $`SU(2)`$ action density which is carried by the $`c`$-vortex vacuum texture properly extrapolates to the continuum limit and, hence, gives rise to a mass dimension four condensate which features in the operator product expansion .

In this letter, we will investigate the question whether the $`c`$-vortex vacuum texture, besides the appealing picture for quark confinement and their hypothetical signature in high energy hadron collision experiments , also provides a quantitative picture of the low lying excitations of pure Yang-Mills theory. For these purposes, we will calculate for the first time the correlation function for the $`0^+`$ and $`2^+`$ glueball channel, respectively, using vortex projected configurations. For this investigation, we confine ourselves to the most simple, but academic case of a pure $`SU(2)`$ gauge theory. An analogous investigation was recently performed using ablian projection to the maximum ablian gauge : in this case, it was observed that abelian (or even monopole) projected configurations still reproduce the $`0^+`$/$`2^+`$glueball masses known from the full theory.

Glueball correlation functions. Glueball screening masses $`m_g`$ are calculated from the correlation functions

$$C(t)=\stackrel{~}{\varphi }(t)\stackrel{~}{\varphi }(0),\text{ }\stackrel{~}{\varphi }(t):=\varphi (t)\varphi $$
(1)
by analyzing the exponential decrease of $`C(t)`$ at asymptotic values of $`t`$, i.e.

$$C(t)\mathrm{exp}\left\{m_gt\right\}\text{ for }t1/m_g.$$
(2)
Thereby $`\varphi (x)`$ is a combination of the link variables which carry the quantum numbers of the glueball under investigation. For choosing a function $`\varphi (x)`$ which generates sufficient overlap with the glueball state, we closely follow the pioneering work of Teper  and define composite link variables

$`U_i^{(N)}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`𝒩\{U_i^{(N1)}(x)U_i^{(N1)}(x+i)`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k\pm i}{}}U_k^{(N1)}(x)U_i^{(N1)}(x+k)U_i^{(N1)}(x+k+i)U_k^{(N1)}(x+i+i)\},`$
where $`i=1\mathrm{}3,k3,2,1,1,2,3`$ and where $`𝒩`$ is a normalization factor to ensure $`U_i^{(N)}U_i^{(N)}=1`$. The link variables $`U_i^{(N)}(x)`$ are defined on a coarser lattice of size $`(N_s^{(N)}/2)^3N_t`$ where $`N_s^{(N)}`$ and $`N_t`$ are the number of lattice points in the spatial directions and in the time direction, respectively, of the finer lattice. The level $`N=0`$ corresponds to the finest level of a $`N_s^{(0)}N_s`$. The glueball operators are defined by means of the plaquette $`P_{ik}^{(N)}(x)`$

$`\varphi ^{0^+}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\text{tr}{\displaystyle \underset{\stackrel{}{x}}{}}\left[P_{12}^{(N)}(\stackrel{}{x},t)+P_{23}^{(N)}(\stackrel{}{x},t)+P_{13}^{(N)}(\stackrel{}{x},t)\right],`$ (4)
$`\varphi ^{2^+}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\text{tr}{\displaystyle \underset{\stackrel{}{x}}{}}\left[P_{12}^{(N)}(\stackrel{}{x},t)P_{13}^{(N)}(\stackrel{}{x},t)\right],`$ (5)
Here, we use the ”blocking” level $`N=2`$ throughout the letter. Using the composite link method for the glueball operators, the glueball screening masses were successfully obtained even for the more realistic case of the gauge group $`SU(3)`$ .

In the present paper, we use a $`N_s=8`$, $`N_t=16`$ lattice and the standard heat bath algorithm to generate the link configurations according to a probability distribution provided by the Wilson action. Using $`\beta =4/g^2`$ (where $`g`$ is the bare gauge coupling) up to values $`2.5`$, we are aware that finite size effects become visible. Our point is, however, to compare the glueball masses calculated from full configurations with those which were obtained by reducing the lattice variables to vortex ensembles rather than to perform a high precision extrapolation to the infinite volume limit. $`15000`$ measurements separated by $`10`$ Monte-Carlo sweeps to reduce auto-correlations were performed to estimate $`C(t)`$ (1). In order to express $`t`$ in physical units, we use the $`\beta `$-dependence of the lattice spacing $`a`$ predicted by one-loop perturbation theory, i.e.

$$\sigma a^2(\beta )=\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0.12}\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{6\pi ^2}{11}(\beta 2.3)\right\},$$
(6)
where the string tension $`\sigma =(440\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V})^2`$ was used as reference scale.

Since $`C(0)`$ is the expectation value of a composite field, $`C(0)`$ acquires additional divergencies even if $`C(t0)`$ is renormalized finite . Hence, we refrain from normalizing $`C(0)`$ to $`1`$, but demand

$$C_R(t)=Z_\varphi ^2C(t),\text{ }C_R(t_0)=\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1},$$
(7)
where $`t_0`$ is the renormalization point. From our numerical simulation, the function $`C(t)`$ at the points $`t=a,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}a`$ obeys the exponential law (2) to good accuracy. This fact allows to evaluate $`C(t_0)`$ by interpolation where $`t_0=0.2`$fm is used throughout this paper. The final result $`C_R(t)`$ is shown in figure 1 for $`\beta =2.3,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2.4},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2.5}`$. The corresponding data points are satisfactorily close to a single exponential curve, thus establishing a renormalization group invariant screening mass. Note that $`C_R(0)`$ changes if different $`\beta `$ values are used, thus reflecting the additional divergency associated with the composite operator. The straight lines in figure (1) represent exponential fits to $`C_R(t)`$ for each $`\beta `$. Averaging over the screening masses obtained by the fit for a given $`\beta `$, we find

$$m_{0^+}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1.67}\pm 0.11\mathrm{GeV},\text{ }m_{2^+}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2.30}\pm 0.08\mathrm{GeV}.$$
(8)
The uncertainties provided in (8) comprise statistical as well as systematic errors due to the extrapolation to the continuum limit. The masses (8) are consistent with the data presented in .

Glueball masses from the c-vortex ensembles. In order to reveal the vortex vacuum structure, we employ the self-restricted cooling procedure proposed in  and fractionize the gauge group $`SU(2)\widehat{=}Z_2\times SO(3)`$. The corresponding degrees of freedom are center vortices and coset fields. The coset part of the $`SU(2)`$ link variables $`U_\mu (x)`$ is isomorphic to the adjoint link

$$O_\mu ^{ab}(x)=\frac{1}{2}\text{tr}\left\{U_\mu (x)\tau ^aU_\mu ^{}(x)\tau ^b\right\}=O^{ab}[A_\mu ^b],\text{ }O_\mu ^{ab}(x)SO(3),$$
(9)
which can be uniquely represented by a gauge vector potential $`A_\mu (x)`$ in the standard fashion. For removing gluonic (coset) degrees of freedom from $`SU(2)`$ configurations, the gluonic action density per link is defined by

$$s_\mu ^{gl}(x)=\underset{\overline{\nu }\pm \mu }{}\left\{1\frac{1}{3}\text{tr}_AO_{\mu \overline{\nu }}(x)\right\}=\frac{1}{3}\underset{\overline{\nu }\pm \mu }{}F_{\mu \overline{\nu }}^a[A]F_{\mu \overline{\nu }}^a[A]a^4+𝒪(a^6),$$
(10)
where $`O_{\mu \nu }(x)`$ is the plaquette calculated in terms of the $`SO(3)`$ link elements $`O_\mu (x)`$ (9). The sum over $`\overline{\nu }`$ runs from $`4\mathrm{}4`$. $`F_{\mu \nu }^a[A]`$ is the (continuum) field strength functional of the (continuum) gluon fields $`A_\mu (x)`$.

Cooling is performed by locally reducing the total gluonic action (10) with respect to the fields $`O_\mu (x)`$. Further cooling of the adjoint link $`O_\mu (x)`$ is rejected if the gluonic action is smaller than some threshold value

$$s_\mu ^{gl}(x)<\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}8}\kappa ^4a^4.$$
(11)
Thereby $`\kappa `$ is a gauge invariant cooling scale of mass dimension one. The cooling procedure stops if the gluonic action density (10) locally has dropped below the critical value specified by $`\kappa `$. Details for the practical application of the cooling procedure can be found in . For $`\kappa =0`$, the cooling procedure completely removes the gluon fields from the SU(2) lattice configurations leaving only gauge equivalents of $`O_\mu (x)=1`$. In fact, even for $`\kappa ^2\sigma `$ the $`SU(2)`$ action density is largely clustered along 2-dimensional vortex world sheets, and the short range force between a static quark anti-quark pair is strongly affected. This is expected since the behavior at small distances is dominated by the exchange of gluons, which are already partially eliminated by cooling. Throughout this paper, the configurations which emerge after ”gluon” cooling with $`\kappa ^2\sigma `$ are labeled $`c`$-vortex ensembles.

In order to investigate the $`c`$-vortex dominance of the glueball screening masses, we evaluate the glueball field combinations (4) and (5) using $`c`$-vortex ensembles obtained after adjoint cooling. Note that the action density of the gluon (coset) fields is by construction limited to $`\kappa ^4(440\mathrm{MeV})^4`$ (see (10) and (11)) implying that the large $`SU(2)`$ action density carried by the $`c`$-vortices is required to sustain screening masses of order $`1.5`$GeV. We employ $`5000`$ measurements to obtained the renormalized correlation function $`C_R(t)`$ calculated with adjoint cooled configurations, using $`\kappa ^2=\sigma `$ and $`\kappa ^2=0.5\sigma `$, respectively. The result is shown in figure 2. Again, the results for several values of $`\beta `$ are consistent with a single exponential law (2) reflecting proper scaling towards the continuum limit. The straight line shown in figure 2 is the fit to the data obtained from full configurations for $`\beta =2.4`$ (see figure 1). We therefore find that the screening masses for the $`0^+`$/$`2^+`$ glueball calculated from full configurations and $`c`$-vortex ensembles, respectively, coincide within the achieved numerical accuracy.

Note that the cooling procedure strongly effects the value $`C_R(0)`$. This is expected since the cooling procedure eliminates UV–divergencies which are generated by gluon (coset) fields of high ($`SO(3)`$) action density, and therefore alleviates the divergencies of the composite operator. Furthermore, we point out that roughly the same statistical error of the screening masses was achieved in the case of the $`c`$-vortex ensembles with a number of measurements which is a factor of three less than the number of measurements employed in the case of full $`SU(2)`$ configurations. This improvement is due to an enhanced overlap of the ”wavefunctions” (4) and (5) with the glueball wavefunctions once the adjoint cooling operates. Following Teper  for an estimate of the overlap, we find

$$\frac{C(2a)}{C(0)}|_{\mathrm{vortex}}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}4.6}\frac{C(2a)}{C(0)}|_{\mathrm{full}},\text{ }\beta =2.4,\kappa ^2=\sigma $$
(12)
for the $`0^+`$ glueball, and

$$\frac{C(2a)}{C(0)}|_{\mathrm{vortex}}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}13.9}\frac{C(2a)}{C(0)}|_{\mathrm{full}},\text{ }\beta =2.4,\kappa ^2=\sigma $$
(13)
for the $`2^+`$ glueball, respectively.

Conclusions. Recently, a self-restricted cooling method was proposed  which gradually removes the $`SU(2)/Z_2`$ gluon (coset) fields from the $`SU(2)`$ lattice configurations paving the way to gauge invariant ($`c`$-)vortex ensembles. Self-restriction ensures that the local gluonic action density does not exceed the cooling scale $`\kappa `$. By definition, $`c`$-vortex configurations are obtained for the choice $`\kappa \sqrt{\sigma }`$, where $`\sigma =(440\mathrm{MeV})^2`$ is the string tension. In the present letter, we have studied the screening masses for the $`0^+`$ and $`2^+`$ glueballs extracted from Teper correlators . Using $`\kappa =\sqrt{\sigma }`$ and $`\kappa =0.7\sqrt{\sigma }`$, we have shown that these screening masses are insensitive to the new cooling method hence providing evidence that the $`0^+`$ and $`2^+`$ glueball masses are dominated by $`c`$-vortex configurations.

Acknowledgements. We thank H. Reinhardt for encouragement and support.