Talk:Indium gallium arsenide

message: 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)
thread_title:  Incomplete list of photodiodes 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Confusion about Gain-Bandwidth product in the section on electron mobility (Mobility of electrons and holes) 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Indium gallium arsenide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  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.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:40, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Band Gap Confusion of InGaAs