text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The problem of a charged particle moving in two dimensions with a magnetic field $`B`$ applied perpendicular to the two-dimensional manifold is known as the (two-dimensional) Landau problem. For $`B`$ very large a perturbation $`V(x_i)`$ of the free Hamiltonian $`_0=\frac{1}{2m}(\pi _1^2+\pi _2^2)`$ can be treated by projecting onto one Landau level. Due to this perturbation, the degeneracy of the levels will be lifted, but, since the energy gap between two separate Landau levels $`B/m`$, is very large, the perturbation does not mix different Landau levels and the projection onto one level is justified.

The procedure of projecting onto one Landau level is known since a long time in solid state physics as the Peierls substitution .

We look how a $`\theta `$-deformation of the underlying manifold effects the Peierls substitution. We use the algebra over the $`\theta `$-deformed plane, $`𝒜_\theta `$, generated by two elements $`\widehat{x}_1`$ and $`\widehat{x}_2`$, which satisfy $`[\widehat{x}_1,\widehat{x}_2]=2\pi i\theta `$. The phase-space of $`\theta `$-deformed quantum mechanics is generated by the coordinates $`\widehat{x}_i`$ and momenta $`\widehat{p}_i,i=1,2`$, subject to the relations

$$[\widehat{x}_1,\widehat{x}_2]=2\pi i\theta ,[\widehat{x}_k,\widehat{p}_l]=i\delta _{k,l}\text{and}[\widehat{p}_1,\widehat{p}_2]=0.$$
(1)
Like in the commutative case, a magnetic field is introduced by replacing the canonical momenta $`\widehat{p}_i`$ by kinetic ones $`\widehat{\pi }_i`$, which are covariant under local $`U(1)`$ gauge transformations $`g=g(\widehat{x}_i)=e^{i\phi (\widehat{x}_i)}`$, i. e. $`\widehat{p}_i\widehat{\pi }_i=\widehat{p}_iA_i`$, with $`A_i=A_i(\widehat{x}_1,\widehat{x}_2)`$ a $`U(1)`$ gauge potential transforming under $`g`$ according to $`A_jA_j^{}=gA_jg^1+ig(_jg^1)`$. Since $`\widehat{x}_1`$ and $`\widehat{x}_2`$ do not commute, also the coordinates have to be replaced by their covariant counterparts $`\widehat{x}_i\widehat{\xi }_i=\widehat{x}_i+2\pi \theta ϵ_{ij}A_j`$. The commutation relations for the covariant phase-space coordinates read

$$[\widehat{\xi }_1,\widehat{\xi }_2]=2\pi i\theta (1+2\pi \theta F),[\widehat{\xi }_k,\widehat{\pi }_l]=i(1+2\pi \theta F)\delta _{k,l}\text{and}[\widehat{\pi }_1,\widehat{\pi }_2]=iF,$$
(2)
with $`F=_{[1}A_{2]}i[A_1,A_2]`$, the gauge field strength. For $`1+2\pi \theta F0`$, these relations are, up to some rescaling, equivalent to

$$[x_1,x_2]=2\pi i\theta ,[x_k,\pi _l]=i\delta _{k,l}\text{and}[\pi _1,\pi _2]=iB,$$
(3)
with $`B=F/(1+2\pi \theta F)`$.

In chapter 2 and 3 we use the well-known projective modules over $`T_\theta ^2`$ and take a connection with constant curvature to obtain representations of the deformed tori algebra. Chapter 4 deals with a different reducible representation motivated by physics. We require that the magnetic translation operators commute with covariant coupled momenta and obtain a quantization condition. The flux turns out to be rational. For irrational deformation parameter $`\theta `$, $`B`$ of Eq. (3) then is always irrational. Translation invariance is broken for nonzero magnetic flux. Using the results of chapters 2 and 4, we calculate the projection of the generators $`U_j=e^{ix_j},j=1,2`$ of $`T_\theta ^2`$ onto one particular Landau level. The projected operators $`U_j^{(\mu )}`$ are represented as finite dimensional matrices.

In chapter 5 we calculate the energy corrections due to a small periodic potential $`V(x_i)=v(\mathrm{cos}x_1+\mathrm{cos}x_2)`$. This yields the so-called Hofstadter butterfly  (or to be more precisely the rational part, i. e. the part arising from rational fluxes, of the Hofstadter butterfly).

## 2 Representation of $`T_\theta ^2`$

The algebra generated by the elements $`U_1`$ and $`U_2`$ subject to the relation

$$U_1U_2=e^{2\pi i\theta }U_2U_1$$
(4)
is known as the algebra of functions over the non-commutative two-torus $`T_\theta ^2`$ with deformation parameter $`\theta `$. Two unitary operators on a Hilbert space obeying Eq. (4) specify a representation of $`T_\theta ^2`$, or, in other words, a module over $`T_\theta ^2`$. Without loss of generality we assume the periods of the torus to be equal to $`2\pi `$. Further we restrict ourselves to irrational $`\theta `$ for the moment.

As shown by Connes and Rieffel , for $`\theta `$ irrational, any $`T_\theta ^2`$-module is either free (for constant magnetic field $`B`$, this corresponds to $`B=0`$) or isomorphic to the module $`E_{n,m}`$ for some integers $`n`$ and $`m`$. The elements of the $`T_\theta ^2`$-module $`E_{n,m}`$ will be Schwartz class functions $`\varphi _j(x)𝒮(\times _m),x,j_m`$, with $`_m`$ the cyclic group of order $`m`$. The action of the generators $`U_i`$ of $`\varphi _j(x)`$ is given by

$`(U_1\varphi )_j(x)`$ $`=\varphi _{j1}(x{\displaystyle \frac{n}{m}}\theta ),`$ (5a)
$`(U_2\varphi )_j(x)`$ $`=e^{2\pi i(xjn/m)}\varphi _j(x),`$ (5b)
with some integer $`n`$.

The projective modules are classified by their $`K`$ theory group which is the rank two abelian group $`^2`$. The set of classes of actual finite projective modules is the cone of positive elements, which for $`^2`$ is

$$\{(x,y)^2;x+\theta y>0\}.$$
(6)
For $`E_{n,m}`$ the coordinates $`x`$ and $`y`$ are

$$x=\sigma n,y=\sigma m,$$
(7)
with $`\sigma =\mathrm{sgn}(n+m\theta )`$ (c.f. ).

A magnetic field $`B`$ perpendicular to the torus is introduced via minimal coupling, i. e. the canonical momenta $`p_j=i_j`$ are replaced by kinetic ones $`\pi _j=i_j`$, with $`_j`$ a connection on the torus with non-vanishing curvature such that

$$[\pi _1,\pi _2]=iB.$$
(8)
On $`E_{n,m}`$ one can always construct connections with constant curvature:

$$_1^{(0)}=\frac{im}{n+m\theta }x,_2^{(0)}=\frac{1}{2\pi }\frac{}{x},$$
(9)
satisfying $`[_k^{(0)},U_l]=i\delta _{k,l}U_l`$.

Next consider an algebra automorphism $`T_\alpha `$ of translations by $`2\pi \alpha _1`$ and $`2\pi \alpha _2`$ on $`T_\theta ^2`$, defined by

$`U_1`$ $`T_\alpha (U_1)=e^{2\pi i\alpha _1}U_1`$ (10a)
$`U_2`$ $`T_\alpha (U_2)=e^{2\pi i\alpha _2}U_2.`$ (10b)
These automorphisms are inner iff $`\alpha _i=k_i\theta +n_i,k_i,n_i`$. On $`E_{n,m}`$ this automorphism is represented by the adjoined action of the operator $`T(\alpha )`$, with

$$(T(\alpha )\varphi )_j=e^{2\pi i\alpha _1\frac{m}{n+m\theta }x}\varphi _j(x\alpha _2).$$
(11)
The action on the connections $`_i^{(0)}`$ is given by

$`_1^{(0)}`$ $`_1^{(\alpha )}=T_\alpha (_1^{(0)})=_1^{(0)}+i\alpha _1{\displaystyle \frac{m}{n+m\theta }},`$ (12a)
$`_2^{(0)}`$ $`_2^{(\alpha )}=T_\alpha (_2^{(0)})=_2^{(0)}i\alpha _2{\displaystyle \frac{m}{n+m\theta }}.`$ (12b)
A review of the $`T_\theta ^2`$-modules $`E_{n,m}`$ can be found in  for example. Using Eq. (8) one easily calculates a $`\theta `$-deformed quantization condition for the magnetic field strength $`B`$:

$$2\pi B=\frac{m}{n+m\theta }.$$
(13)
## 3 Representation of the Projected $`U_i`$

Using the representation of the kinetic momenta $`\pi _j=i_j^{(\alpha )}`$ on $`T_\theta ^2`$, introduced in the previous section, we can calculate the eigenfunctions $`\psi _{\mu ,j}(x)`$ of the free Landau Hamiltonian

$$_0=\frac{1}{2}(\pi _1^2+\pi _2^2),$$
(14)
$`\psi _{\mu ,j}(x)`$ $`=:x|\mu ,j=:\psi _\mu (x)\widehat{e}_j`$
$`=𝒩_\mu e^{2\pi i\alpha _1\frac{m}{n+m\theta }x}\varphi _\mu \left(\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi m}{n+m\theta }}}(x\alpha _2)\right)\widehat{e}_j,`$ (15)
with $`\varphi _\mu (x)=e^{x^2/2}H_\mu (x),𝒩_\mu =\sqrt{2^{\mu 1}\mu !}(2(n/m+\theta ))^{1/4},H_\mu (x)`$ the $`\mu `$th Hermite polynomial and $`\widehat{e}_j=\widehat{e}_{j+m}`$ the $`(jmodm)`$th unit vector of $`^m`$. The eigenfunctions are orthonormal with respect to the scalar product

$$\mu ,j|\mu ^{},j^{}=\left(_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑x\psi _\mu ^{}(x)\psi _\mu ^{}(x)\right)(\widehat{e}_j\widehat{e}_j^{})=\delta _{\mu ,\mu ^{}}\delta _{j,j^{}}.$$
(16)
Since $`\psi _{\mu ,j+m}(x)=\psi _\mu (x)`$ each Landau level $`\mu `$ is spanned by $`m`$ orthonormal eigenfunctions $`\psi _{\mu ,j}(x),j=0,\mathrm{}m1`$, i. e. each wave-function $`\psi _\mu (x)`$ of the $`\mu `$th Landau level can be represented as an $`m`$-dimensional vector $`\stackrel{}{c}=(c_0,c_1,\mathrm{}c_{m1})`$ by $`\psi _\mu (x)=_{j=0}^{m1}x_jx|\mu ,j`$.

For fixed $`\alpha _i`$ and using the projector $`P_\mu =_{j=0}^{m1}|\mu ,j\mu ,j|`$ onto the $`\mu `$th Landau level we get an $`m`$-dimensional representation $`\rho ^{(m,n)}`$ of the projected generators of $`T_\theta ^2`$, $`U_i^{(\mu )}=P_\mu U_1P_\mu `$:

$`\rho ^{(m,n)}(U_1^{(\mu )})_{j,j^{}}`$ $`=c_\mu (\alpha _1)\delta _{j,(j^{}+1)modm}`$ (17a)
$`\rho ^{(m,n)}(U_2^{(\mu )})_{j,j^{}}`$ $`=c_\mu (\alpha _2)e^{2\pi i\frac{n}{m}j}\delta _{j,j^{}},`$ (17b)
with $`c_\mu (\alpha )=e^{1/(4B)+2\pi \alpha }L_\mu (1/(2B))`$ and $`L_\mu `$ the $`\mu `$th Laguerre polynomial. The commutation relation of the projected generators $`U_i^{(\mu )}`$ then reads

$$U_1^{(\mu )}U_2^{(\mu )}=e^{2\pi i\frac{n}{m}}U_2^{(\mu )}U_1^{(\mu )}=e^{\frac{i}{B}2\pi i\theta }U_2^{(\mu )}U_1^{(\mu )}.$$
(18)
The representation of the (unprojected) $`U_i`$ is infinite dimensional since $`\theta `$ is irrational. There are infinitely many Landau levels, labeled by $`\mu `$, each of which is $`m`$-fold degenerated. By projecting onto a finite dimensional subspace of the representation space, i. e. onto one Landau level, the $`U_i^{(\mu )}`$ become finite dimensional matrices with some modified commutation relation (18).

The representation $`\rho ^{(m,n)}`$ is irreducible iff $`m`$ and $`n`$ are relatively prime. For $`\mathrm{gcd}(m,n)=d`$, $`m^{}=m/d`$ and $`n=n/d`$, $`\rho ^{(m,n)}`$ decomposes into $`d`$ $`m^{}`$-dimensional representations $`\rho _0^{(m^{},n^{};j/d)}`$, with

$`\rho _0^{(m^{},n^{};\lambda )}(U_1^{(\mu )})`$ $`=e^{2\pi i\frac{\lambda }{m^{}}}\rho ^{(m^{},n^{})}(U_1^{(\mu )})`$ (19a)
$`\rho _0^{(m^{},n^{};\lambda )}(U_2^{(\mu )})`$ $`=\rho ^{(m^{},n^{})}(U_2^{(\mu )})`$ (19b)
and $`j=0,\mathrm{}d1`$.

## 4 Different Representation of $`U_i`$

Next we consider a different representation of $`T_\theta ^2`$ on the space of smooth functions over $`^2`$ motivated by physics, with

$$(U_1\psi )(x,y)=e^{ix}\psi (x,y\pi \theta ),\text{and}(U_2\psi )(x,y)=e^{iy}\psi (x+\pi \theta ,y).$$
(20)
We require special boundary conditions on $`\psi `$:

$`\psi (x+2\pi n,y)`$ $`=e^{2\pi i\delta _1}\psi (x,y),`$ (21a)
$`\psi (x,y+2\pi (n+{\displaystyle \frac{m\theta }{2}}))`$ $`=e^{2\pi i\delta _2imx}\psi (x,y).`$ (21b)
Eqs. (21) result from the study of magnetic translation operators (see below).

The kinetic momenta $`\pi _i`$ will be represented (up to some gauge transformation) as

$`(\pi _1\psi )(x,y)`$ $`=(i(1\pi \theta B)_x+By)\psi (x,y)\text{and}`$ (22a)
$`(\pi _2\psi )(x,y)`$ $`=i_y\psi (x,y).`$ (22b)
In the representation (20), the commutant of $`T_\theta ^2`$ is generated by four elements $`Z_i,i=1,\mathrm{}4`$ represented as

$`(Z_1\psi )(x,y)`$ $`=e^{\frac{i}{n}x}\psi (x,y+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi \theta }{n}}),`$ (23a)
$`(Z_2\psi )(x,y)`$ $`=e^{\frac{i}{n+m\theta }y}\psi (x+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi \theta }{n+m\theta }},y),`$ (23b)
$`(Z_3\psi )(x,y)`$ $`=\psi (x+2\pi ,y)\text{and}`$ (23c)
$`(Z_4\psi )(x,y)`$ $`=e^{i\frac{m}{n}x}\psi (x,y+2\pi (1+{\displaystyle \frac{m\theta }{2n}})),`$ (23d)
which fulfill the commutation relations $`Z_kZ_l=e^{2\pi i\mathrm{\Theta }_{k,l}}Z_lZ_k`$, with

$$\mathrm{\Theta }=\frac{1}{n}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& \frac{\theta }{n+m\theta }& 1& 0\\ \frac{\theta }{n+m\theta }& 0& 0& 1\\ 1& 0& 0& m\\ 0& 1& m& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(24)
The entries of the matrix $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ have to be taken $`mod`$, since they only appear in the exponent.

The magnetic translation operators $`T_i,i=1,2`$ are chosen such that they leave the Hamiltonian (14) invariant, i. e. they must commute with $`\pi _i`$. In the present gauge (22) this gives two generators of magnetic translations by the periods of the torus, $`T_1=Z_3`$ and $`T_2=Z_4`$.

Using a potential generated by $`U_i`$, the Hamiltonian and thus the physical setup is invariant under a translation by $`2\pi n_1`$ and $`2\pi n_2`$, respectively. Therefore we have $`T_i^{n_i}𝕀`$. This physical requirement yields a quantization of the magnetic flux per unit cell:

$$2\pi \frac{2\pi nB}{12\pi B\theta }=2\pi m2\pi B=\frac{m}{n+m\theta },$$
(25)
with some integer $`m`$ and $`n=\mathrm{gcd}(n_1,n_2)`$. Using this quantization condition we see that $`T_1^n`$ and $`T_2^n`$ commute with all the other operators and thus lie in the center of $`T_\theta ^2`$. From the form of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ in Eq. (24) we see that for $`\theta `$ irrational, the center of $`T_\theta ^2`$ is generated by these two operators. In the representation (23), $`T_1^n=e^{2\pi i\delta _1}𝕀`$ and $`T_2^n=e^{2\pi i\delta _2}𝕀`$ due to the boundary conditions (21). Thus the representation of the center of $`T_\theta ^2`$ is trivial for $`\theta `$ irrational. For $`\theta `$, the center of $`T_\theta ^2`$ is generated by $`T_1^n(=Z_3^n),T_2^n(=Z_4^n),Z_1^q`$ and $`Z_2^q`$, where $`q`$ is some integer depending on $`\theta ,m`$ and $`n`$. Thus the center no longer has a trivial representation.

The energy spectrum of the free Landau-Hamiltonian (14) with the kinetic momenta $`\pi _i`$ of (22) is given by $`\epsilon _\mu =B(\mu +\frac{1}{2})`$, where $`\mu `$ labels the Landau levels. The corresponding eigenfunctions of the $`\mu `$th Landau level have to be a superposition of functions $`\psi _{\mu ,k}`$

$$\psi _{\mu ,k}(x,y)=𝒩_\mu e^{ikx}e^{\frac{B}{2}(y+(\frac{1}{B}\pi \theta )k)^2}H_\mu (\sqrt{B}(y+(\frac{1}{B}\pi \theta )k)),$$
(26)
with $`𝒩_\mu =(2^{2\mu }\pi \mu !^2/B)^{1/4}`$.

Using the first boundary condition (21a), we get $`k=(l+\delta _1)/n`$, with $`l`$. Thus any wave-function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y)`$ can be written as

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(x,y)=\underset{l=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}c_le^{i\frac{l+\delta _1}{n}x}\varphi _l(y),$$
(27)
with $`\varphi _l(y)=\varphi (\sqrt{B}(y+(\frac{1}{B}\pi \theta )\frac{l+\delta _1}{n}))=\varphi _{l+nm}(yn\mathrm{\Lambda })`$. The second boundary condition (21b) gives $`c_{l+nm}=e^{2\pi i\delta _2}c_l`$. Replacing $`c_l=e^{\frac{2\pi i}{mn}l\delta _2}d_l`$, the $`\mu `$th Landau level is spanned by $`mn`$ eigenfunctions

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \psi _{\mu ,r}(x,y)=:x,y|\mu ,r=𝒩_\mu \underset{k=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}& e^{2\pi i\frac{kmn+r}{mn}\delta _2}e^{i(km+\frac{r+\delta _1}{n})x}\hfill \\ & \varphi _\mu \left(\sqrt{B}(y+(\frac{1}{B}\pi \theta )\frac{kmn+r+\delta _1}{n})\right),\hfill \end{array}$$
(28)
with $`r=0,\mathrm{}mn1,𝒩_\mu =\sqrt{2^{\mu 1}\mu !}(2(n/m+\theta ))^{1/4},\varphi _\mu (y)=e^{y^2/2}H_\mu (y)`$ and $`H_\mu (y)`$ the $`\mu `$th Hermite polynomial. These eigenfunctions are orthonormal with respect to the scalar product

$$\mu ,r|\mu ^{},r^{}=_{n\pi }^{n\pi }\frac{dx}{2\pi n}_0^{n\mathrm{\Lambda }}𝑑y\psi _{\mu ,r}^{}(x,y)\psi _{\mu ^{},r^{}}(x,y)=\delta _{\mu ,\mu ^{}}\delta _{r,r^{}}.$$
(29)
Translations by $`\stackrel{}{a}=(a_x,a_y)`$ on the torus are given by an operator $`T(\stackrel{}{a})`$ with $`T(\stackrel{}{a})U_j=e^{ia_j}U_jT(\stackrel{}{a})`$ and commuting with the kinetic momenta. In the presence of a magnetic field $`B`$, these two conditions on commutation relations with $`U_i`$ and $`\pi _i`$ given in (20) and (22), respectively, yield a representation of the magnetic translation operator of the form

$$(T(\stackrel{}{a})\psi )(x,y)=e^{i\frac{B}{12\pi \theta B}a_yx}\psi (xa_x,y\frac{1\pi \theta B}{12\pi \theta B}a_y).$$
(30)
For $`B0`$ translations by an arbitrary vector $`\stackrel{}{a}`$ do not leave the space of sections, satisfying (21) for fixed $`\delta _i`$, invariant (as this would be the case for $`B=0`$), as can be seen from the commutation relation

$$T_1^{nk_1}T_2^{nk_2}T(\stackrel{}{a})=e^{im(a_yk_1a_xk_2)}T(\stackrel{}{a})T_1^{nk_1}T_2^{nk_2},$$
(31)
with $`k_i`$. One rather has to demand $`\stackrel{}{a}=\frac{2\pi }{m}(n_1,n_2)`$ with $`n_i`$ (cf. \[7, Sec. 6\]) for the commutative ($`\theta =0`$) case).

Analog to the previous section, a projection onto the $`\mu `$th Landau level, using the projection operator $`P_\mu =_{r=0}^{mn1}|\mu ,r\mu ,r|`$ yields a $`mn`$-dimensional representation $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }^{(m,n)}`$ of the projected generators of $`T_\theta ^2`$, $`U_i^{(\mu )}=P_\mu U_iP_\mu `$:

$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }^{(m,n)}(U_1^{(\mu )})_{j,j^{}}`$ $`=c_\mu ({\displaystyle \frac{\delta _2}{m}})\delta _{j,(j+n)modmn}`$ (32a)
$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }^{(m,n)}(U_2^{(\mu )})_{j,j^{}}`$ $`=c_\mu ({\displaystyle \frac{\delta _1}{m}})e^{\frac{2\pi i}{m}j}\delta _{j,j^{}},`$ (32b)
with $`c_\mu (\alpha )=e^{1/(4B)+2\pi \alpha }L_\mu (1/(2B))`$ and $`L_\mu `$ the $`\mu `$th Laguerre polynomial. Again we choose fixed phases $`\delta _i`$. The representations $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }^{(m,n)}`$ are reducible and reduce to $`n`$ $`m`$-dimensional representations $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_1^{(m,n;j)}`$, with

$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_1^{(m,n;j)}(U_1^{(\mu )})`$ $`=\rho ^{(m,n)}(U_1^{(\mu )}),`$ (33a)
$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_1^{(m,n;j)}(U_2^{(\mu )})`$ $`=e^{2\pi i\frac{j}{m}}\rho ^{(m,n)}(U_2^{(\mu )}),`$ (33b)
$`j=0,\mathrm{}n1`$ and $`\rho ^{(m,n)}`$ given in (17). To be consistent with the definition of $`\rho ^{(m,n)}`$ we have to replace $`\alpha _1\delta _2/m`$ and $`\alpha _2\delta _1/m`$. For the sake of simplicity we set $`c_\mu (\alpha )=1`$, keeping in mind, that we have to reinsert this factor at the end of the calculations.

For $`m`$ and $`n`$ relatively prime, the representations $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_1^{(m,n;j)}`$ are irreducible and unitary equivalent to $`\rho ^{(m,n)}`$. For $`\mathrm{gcd}(m,n)=d`$, $`m^{}=m/d`$ and $`n^{}=n/d`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_1^{(m,n;j)}`$ decomposes into $`d`$ $`m^{}`$-dimensional representations $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_1^{(m^{},n^{};j/d,j^{}/d)}`$, with

$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_0^{(m^{},n^{};\lambda ,\lambda ^{})}(U_1^{(\mu )})`$ $`=e^{2\pi i\frac{\lambda ^{}}{m^{}}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_1^{(m^{},n^{};\lambda )}(U_1^{(\mu )})=e^{2\pi i\frac{\lambda }{m}}\rho _0^{(m^{},n^{};\lambda ^{}\lambda )}(U_1^{(\mu )})`$ (34a)
$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_0^{(m,n;\lambda ,\lambda ^{})}(U_2^{(\mu )})`$ $`=\stackrel{~}{\rho }_1^{(m^{},n^{};\lambda )}(U_2^{(\mu )})=e^{2\pi i\frac{\lambda }{m}}\rho _0^{(m,n;\lambda ^{}\lambda )}(U_2^{(\mu )})`$ (34b)
and $`j=0,\mathrm{}dn1`$ and $`j^{}=0,d1`$. It is easy to see that $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_1^{(m,n;\lambda ,\lambda ^{})}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_1^{(m,n;\lambda +1,\lambda ^{})}`$. Thus any (reducible) representation $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }^{(md,nd)}`$, with $`m`$ and $`n`$ relatively prime, decomposes into a direct sum of irreducible representations $`\rho _0^{(m,n;\lambda )},\lambda `$:

$$\stackrel{~}{\rho }^{(md,nd)}\underset{\nu =0}{\overset{n1}{}}\underset{j=0}{\overset{d1}{}}e^{2\pi i\frac{j}{md}}\underset{j^{}=0}{\overset{d1}{}}\rho _0^{(m,n;\frac{j^{}}{d})},$$
(35)
with $`\rho _0^{(m,n;\lambda )}`$ given in (19).

## 5 Energy Corrections Due to a Periodic Potential

Using the results of the previous sections, we calculate the energy corrections to the $`\mu `$th Landau level due to a small periodic perturbation $`V(x_1,x_2)`$ of the free Hamiltonian (14). Provided the perturbation is small compared to the energy gap between two different Landau level, i. e. $`V`$ does not mix between states of two different Landau levels, we can use degenerate perturbation theory up to first order. The corrections to the $`\mu `$th Landau level are obtained by the eigenvalues of $`V`$ projected onto this level.

Assume a simple periodic potential

$$V(x_1,x_2)=2v(\mathrm{cos}x_1+\mathrm{cos}x_2)=v(U_1+U_1^{}+U_2+U_2^{}).$$
(36)
Using the representation $`\rho ^{(m,n)}`$ of (17), the projected potential $`V^{(\mu )}=P_\mu VP_\mu `$ is represented as an $`m\times m`$-dimensional matrix $`V^{(\mu ;m,n)}:=\rho ^{(m,n)}(V^{(\mu )})`$. For $`\mathrm{gcd}(m,n)=d>1`$, this matrix decomposes into $`d`$ $`\frac{m}{d}`$-dimensional matrices $`V_0^{(\mu ;m^{},n^{};j/d)}:=\rho _0^{(m^{},n^{};j/d)}(V^{(\mu )})`$, with $`m^{}=m/d`$ and $`n^{}=n/d`$. In the following we always assume $`m`$ and $`n`$ relatively prime and write $`md`$ and $`nd`$ if we want to express that they have a common divisor $`d`$. The matrices $`V_0^{(\mu ;m^{},n^{};j/d)}`$, $`j=0,\mathrm{}d1`$, have the explicit form

$$\begin{array}{c}(V_0^{(\mu ;m,n;\lambda )})_{r,r^{}}=c_\mu (e^{2\pi i(\frac{\lambda }{m}+\alpha _1)}\delta _{r,(r^{}+1)modm}+e^{2\pi i(\frac{\lambda }{m}+\alpha _1)}\delta _{r,(r^{}1)modm}\hfill \\ \hfill +2\mathrm{cos}(2\pi \frac{n}{m}r2\pi \alpha _2)\delta _{r,r^{}}),\end{array}$$
(37)
with $`r,r^{}=0,\mathrm{}m1`$, $`c_\mu =e^{1/(4B)}L_\mu (1/(2B))`$ an $`L_\mu `$ the $`\mu `$th Laguerre polynomial. According to Wilkinson  the eigenvalues $`\epsilon `$ of $`V_0^{(\mu ;m^{},n^{};j/d)}`$ are obtained by an equation of the form

$$P(\epsilon )=\mathrm{cos}2\pi (\frac{j}{d}+m\alpha _1)+\mathrm{cos}2\pi m\alpha _2,$$
(38)
with $`P(\epsilon )`$ some $`m`$th order polynomial, independent of $`\alpha _i`$ and $`j`$.

Using the representation $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }^{(m,n)}`$ of (32), the corresponding $`d^2mn`$-dimensional matrix $`\stackrel{~}{V}^{(\mu ;md,nd)}:=\stackrel{~}{\rho }^{(md,nd)}(V^{(\mu )})`$ decomposes into $`d^2n`$ $`m`$-dimensional matrices $`\stackrel{~}{V}_0^{(\mu ;m^{},n^{};j/d,j^{}/d)}`$, $`j,j^{}=0,\mathrm{}d1`$, with

$$\begin{array}{c}(\stackrel{~}{V}_0^{(\mu ;m,n;j/d,j^{}/d)})_{r,r^{}}=c_\mu (e^{\frac{2\pi i}{md}(j+\delta _2)}\delta _{r,(r^{}+1)modm}+e^{\frac{2\pi i}{md}(j+\delta _2)}\delta _{r,(r^{}1)modm}\hfill \\ \hfill +2\mathrm{cos}(2\pi \frac{n}{m}r2\pi \frac{j^{}\delta _1}{md})\delta _{r,r^{}}).\end{array}$$
(39)
Using the result of Wilkinson  again, one gets an equation of the form

$$P(\epsilon )=\mathrm{cos}\frac{2\pi }{d}(j+\delta _2)+\mathrm{cos}\frac{2\pi }{d}(j^{}\delta _1).$$
(40)
From Eq. (40) it follows that we can get rid of rational phases $`\delta _i=p_i/q_i`$ in the boundary conditions (21), choosing a $`q_i`$-times enlarged super-cell, i. e. replacing $`dq_id`$ and choosing $`j=p_1`$ and $`j^{}=p_2`$, respectively, which is clear from a physical point of view.

There is another fact we want to point out. To get the energy corrections to the $`\mu `$th Landau level due to the perturbation (36) for a fixed magnetic field, i. e. a fixed ratio $`\frac{m}{n}`$, one has to calculate all eigenvalues of the matrices $`V^{(\mu ;md,nd)}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{V}^{(\mu ;md,nd)}`$, respectively, for $`d=1,2,\mathrm{}`$. Using representation (39) and taking $`j,j^{}=0,\mathrm{}d1`$, with $`d\mathrm{}`$, the (rational part of) the Hofstadter butterfly spectrum is obtained. By the representation (37) we take only $`j=0,\mathrm{}d1`$, $`d\mathrm{}`$ and obtain only half of the values of $`P(\epsilon )`$ of Eq. (40). This is shown in Fig. 1 for $`\alpha _2=0`$ (a) and $`\alpha _2=\frac{1}{2m}`$ (b). Since we imposed toroidal boundary conditions on the configuration space, the magnetic flux is some rational number. So only the rational part, i. e. the part belonging to rational fluxes of the butterfly arises.

In either representation, the spectrum for fixed $`\alpha _i`$, $`\delta _i`$ is a pure point spectrum, which splits into $`m`$ separate parts, in each of which the eigenvalues $`\epsilon `$ lie dense (for $`d\mathrm{}`$). In Fig. 2 the spectrum of $`\stackrel{~}{V}^{(\mu ;md,nd)}`$ for $`d\mathrm{}`$ is plotted in units of the band width, $`ve^{\frac{1}{4B}}L_\mu (\frac{1}{2B})`$. One sees that the $`\theta `$-deformation of the underlying manifold has no effect on the spectrum (besides a rescaling $`B\frac{B}{12\pi \theta B}`$).