Talk:Indium gallium arsenide

Incomplete list of photodiodes

The commercial list of InGaAs photodiodes is incomplete. Please add www.judsontechnologies.com to the roster. Judson is a world leader in infrared photodetector technology. Thank you George Gasparian Judson Technologies

Adding most commercial links is against wikipedia policies. Materialscientist (talk) 05:56, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion about Gain-Bandwidth product in the section on electron mobility (Mobility of electrons and holes)

Is the equation formatted correctly? As it is, it renders like this:

$Gain={\frac {\mu _{\rm {e}}}{\mu _{\rm {h}}}}Gain-Bandwidth={\frac {\mu _{\rm {e}}V}{\pi L^{2}}}$

Which makes very little sense from a dimensional analysis standpoint. Gain (I assume) is dimensionless, and mu-e/mu-h is also dimensionless (since the dimensions of the top and bottom terms cancel), so (mu-e/mu-h)*Gain should also be dimensionless. But the way it's formatted implies that (mu-e/mu-h)*Gain has Bandwidth subtracted from it, which would mean we're subtracting Bandwidth (I assume measured in Hertz, units time^-1) from a dimensionless quantity. I was also confused about what L stands for, but after some dimensional analysis I conjectured that it must be length (length of what?), in order to get mu-e * Volts / (pi * L^2) to give units in Hertz (time^-1). But that would still imply Gain is measured in Hertz, which makes no sense to me.

When I looked at the page source, I (think I) finally figured out what was going on: there were actually two equations posted with no line break in between, combining them into what looks like a single nonsensical equation. Also, the phrase "Gain-Bandwidth" renders as (Gain minus Bandwidth), when it's actually supposed to be (Gain times bandwidth). So the correct rendering of the equations should be:

$Gain={\frac {\mu _{\rm {e}}}{\mu _{\rm {h}}}}$

$Gain\times Bandwidth={\frac {\mu _{\rm {e}}V}{\pi L^{2}}}$

Which at least makes sense from a dimensional analysis POV, although it still leaves me confused about how the second equation was derived: I can conjecture that Bandwidth must equal (mu-h * volts)/(pi * length^2), but there's no explanation for why this would be.

Can someone in the know fix this, or at least explain it better? Or both?

97.84.96.60 (talk) 06:03, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

After consultation with another user, I removed the offending subsection. Here's a link to the diff page, in case the material can be corrected and merged back into the article: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Indium_gallium_arsenide&diff=653437660&oldid=648673983 97.84.96.60 (talk) 09:51, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Indium gallium arsenide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060104034345/http://www.three-fives.com:80/microelectronic_news/APRIL_micro_news/110405Record_transistor_Feng_etal.htm to http://www.three-fives.com/microelectronic_news/APRIL_micro_news/110405Record_transistor_Feng_etal.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:40, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Band Gap Confusion of InGaAs

It is confusing to state that the band gap of a ternary alloy is just 1 discrete value. This is due to the band gap changing with alloy fraction. I do believe that this band gap is for STANDARD InGaAs (53% InAs 47%GaAs). Maybe it would be useful to add the bowing equation for InGaAs/InP? Tigercatface (talk) 12:47, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]