TheEEStory.com

PORTLAND, Ore. —The EE inventors of the transistor-laser (TL) —a transistor with both optical and electrical outputs—claim it fits perfectly within the semiconductor migration path to integrated optics. Unfortunately, all the electronics textbooks will have to be rewritten to use TLs in circuits, inventors say, because the transistor-laser breaks the time-worn concept of conservation of charge—Kirchhoff's Law.

Link: http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle....

Charge is not conserved. Charge and Energy is conserved in this experimental result.

EESU does what ...............

What does this do to Tom's charge argument??

Hmmmmmmmm...

PNeilson, can you please speculate on what this means for those of us who do not readily see the ramifications?

The arguments of why an EESU don't work focus on Kirchoff's law. Tom's arguments are based on Kirchoff being true.

Oops - Tom's arguments are broken by this new result.

My model of how an EESU works is supported by this new experimental result, qualitatively.

Now if I could just get my hands on the journal paper to see how it will help me work out my EESU theory quantitatively

Transistor laser breaks Kirchhoff's law.

But with a transistor laser some of the current goes to creating the laser beam—mixing charge conservation with energy conservation.

Charge inside the Weir coated CMBT nugget is IN
Alumina photon trapping is IN

Gauss's law is no longer relevant........

Gauss is OUT

Hmmm,

This may be what Silex are doing with their new semiconductor technology. I wonder??

ref. ASX:SLX

kind regards
ei

Eenigma,

You will find that charge is still conserved in these devices if you look carefully enough. Even in nuclear explosions charge is still conserved. Since charge is always conserved then Gauss's law still applies. Even when we have teleportation charge will still be conserved.

Regards,
Peter

Technopete wrote:

Eenigma,

You will find that charge is still conserved in these devices if you look carefully enough. Even in nuclear explosions charge is still conserved. Since charge is always conserved then Gauss's law still applies. Even when we have teleportation charge will still be conserved.

Regards,
Peter

Techno,

It's time for ee-tom to come back. :)

Doesn't a radio transmitter do the same? A big transmitter can have many amps flowing up a wire and vanishing at the antenna.

Charge is a very ill defined word in electronics. The charge of a subatomic particle is a well defined word.

Kirchoff's 1st rule is precise:
The principle of conservation of electric charge implies that:
At any node (junction) in an electrical circuit, the sum of currents flowing into that node is equal to the sum of currents flowing out of that node.

Kirchoff's 2nd rule says:
The principle of conservation of energy implies that
The directed sum of the electrical potential differences (voltage) around any closed circuit must be zero.

EETimes says

"At any junction in an electrical circuit, the sum of currents flowing into that node is equal to the sum of currents flowing out of that node." But with a transistor laser some of the current goes to creating the laser beam—mixing charge conservation with energy conservation.

I don't know how to read this exactly.

I sure wish I could read the journal article!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Feng

Milton Feng co-created the first transistor laser, working with Nick Holonyak in 2004. The paper discussing their work was voted in 2006 as one of the five most important papers published by the American Institute of Physics since its founding 75 years ago. In addition to the invention of transistor laser, he is also well known for inventions of other "major breakthrough" devices, including the world's fastest transistor and light emitting transistor (LET). He is currently a professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and holds the Nick Holonyak Jr. Endowed Chair Professorship.

The author is pretty accomplished.

n 2003, Milton Feng and his graduate students Walid Hafez and Jie-Wei Lai broke the record for the world's fastest transistor. Their device, made of indium phosphide and indium gallium arsenide with 25nm-thick base and 75nm-thick collector, marked a frequency of 509 GHz, which was 57 GHz faster than the previous record. In 2005, they were successful to fabricate a device at Micro and Nanotechnology Laboratory to break their own record, reaching 604 GHz. In the following year, he and his other graduate student William Snodgrass fabricated a device with 12.5nm-thick base, operating at 765 GHz at room temperature and 845 GHz at minus 55 Celsius degrees.

Tom - is this guy is delusional?

No way!
If elementary charge is not conserved then all of modern physics is busted!

A current is charge density times a net velocity. If the velocity goes to zero the current goes to zero BUT that does not mean the charge goes to zero. You can still have charge accumulation at a point.

The conversion of electric current energy into photon energy still conserves charge. Think of an electron being pushed into an excited state which then radiates photons when it decays back to its ground state. The electron is still there, just in a different state. If the means of excitation happened via a collision between the atom and an external charge then the atoms electron and the external electron still exist after the interaction.

I can't believe you guys could buy into non charge conservation. Every physics department in the world would be immediately investigating such an event.

-Doug

Tec wrote:

Doesn't a radio transmitter do the same? A big transmitter can have many amps flowing up a wire and vanishing at the antenna.

No.
An antenna uses an oscillating current. Back and forth. It is the acceleration of charge that gives rise to radiation. The time average charge along the antenna is zero. No loss of charge.

Milton Feng is ignorant cretin or shameless self-promoting dick, or both.

Last edited Sat, 15 May 2010, 1:19am by Y_Po

No charge conservation? I think they will find the physical proof of that just the day after orbo proves its perpetuum mobile.

The unique properties of the transistor laser required Holonyak, Feng and graduate student Han Wui to re-examine and modify the law to account for photons as well as electrons, effectively expanding it from a current law to a current-energy law.

"The previous law had to do with the particles – electrons coming out at a given point. But it was never about energy conservation as it was normally known and used," commented Feng. "This is the first time we see how energy is involved in the conservation process."

PN wrote:

The arguments of why an EESU don't work focus on Kirchoff's law. Tom's arguments are based on Kirchoff being true.

Oops - Tom's arguments are broken by this new result.

My model of how an EESU works is supported by this new experimental result, qualitatively.

Now if I could just get my hands on the journal paper to see how it will help me work out my EESU theory quantitatively

Bad reporting, possibly loose talk from scientists, as usual. Obviously with non-electrical energy emitted at a junction things are different. Energy is lost not just through resistance to heat, but over this lasing junction as a voltage drop (the band gap).

But Kirchoff's Current Law, which relates to currents in & out of a node, and conservation of charge, remains.

In fact to get at energy conservation (which is the bit that changes), you need to look at voltage.

Unfortunately Kirchoff's Voltage Law also remains, since it is property of electrical field, so the "expansion" does not in any way break the existing laws, and is a bit of PR - though why they need more PR than they already have for a clever invention god alone knows.

Please note PN you can prove almost any speculation with sloppy interpretation of other people's work (this work, in particular, is impressive and potentially very useful).

As others have commented here, conservation of charge is as fundamental as it gets, and not broken even in the LHC. If you support an EESU mechanism that requires you to break this rule then I am afraid you have hubris of megalomaniac scale.

Bye.

"The previous law had to do with the particles – electrons coming out at a given point. But it was never about energy conservation as it was normally known and used," commented Feng. "This is the first time we see how energy is involved in the conservation process."

"Bloggers can't read"

Po the guy has a paper voted by the APS as one of the top 5 APS papers in the last 75 years. I am sure you must be right and he knows nothing of a resistor, not.

PS. A resistor is not a "perfect infrared light emitter". There are a few other kinds of vibrations involved. Such a shame that your knowledge of thermodynamics is so dreadful. Sort of puts you high up in the ignorant physicist asshole category.

PNeilson CS10/5 wrote:

"Bloggers can't read"

Po the guy has a paper voted by the APS as one of the top 5 APS papers in the last 75 years.

I am sure you must be right and he knows nothing of a resistor, not.

PS. A resistor is not a "perfect infrared light emitter". There are a few other kinds of vibrations involved.

Such a shame that your knowledge of thermodynamics is so dreadful.

Sort of puts you high up in the ignorant physicist asshole category.

DG, English is a slippery language.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge for the myriad uses of the word 'Charge'.

We all know elementary charge is conserved.

But what exactly does the word 'charge' mean in an Electrical Engineering sense. What does EMF 'Electromotive Force' mean?

Reading this article http://www.ece.illinois.edu/mediacenter/article...

We find,

"This posed a conundrum for researchers working with the laser: How were they to apply the laws of conservation of charge and conservation of energy with two forms of energy output?

“The optical signal is connected and related to the electrical signals, but until now it’s been dismissed in a transistor,” said Holonyak, who holds the John Bardeen Endowed Chair in Electrical and Computer Engineering and Physics. “Kirchhoff’s law takes care of balancing the charge, but it doesn’t take care of balancing the energies. The question is, how do you put it all together and represent it in circuit language?” "

Well this is a little more precise than the reporters language

Boy, these EEs are stupid.
LEDs, photo-diodes and photo-transistors and opto-pairs are standard elements in any circuit simulation program, as well as resistors :)

There goes Po again - displaying his ignorance for all the world to read. No wonder he tries to remain anonymous.

Po, did you ever touch a resistor that was dropping a lot of voltage? Did the spectrograph in your eye ever look at the spectrum emitted by the resistor. Did you ever push enough current through the resistor that it emitted white light?

You really should choose your words better, "perfect infrared emitter" is hardly correct when describing something as varied as a 'resistor'.

As to my category, I readily admit to fitting into the 'Asshole' part of the category. Although, it really is better defined as 'Masshole' as Mass residents are called in the "Live Free or Die" state. I would protest the 'Stupid' part of the category except that I am proving my stupidity by replying to you.

resistor is perfect infrared light emitter

Tom

You really can't read. Try reflecting more before writing. Actually thinking about and considering what someone else wrote before commenting on what they wrote might improve your commentary.

T wrote as follows:

"EETimes says

"At any junction in an electrical circuit, the sum of currents flowing into that node is equal to the sum of currents flowing out of that node." But with a transistor laser some of the current goes to creating the laser beam—mixing charge conservation with energy conservation.

I don't know how to read this exactly.

I sure wish I could read the journal article!"

You respond that I am 'sloppy' in interpretation.

Ah well - Tom, you can't read.

resistor is imperfect infrared light emitter

PNeilson CS10/5 wrote:

Tom

You really can't read. Try reflecting more before writing. Actually thinking about and considering what someone else wrote before commenting on what they wrote might improve your commentary.

T wrote as follows:

"EETimes says

"At any junction in an electrical circuit, the sum of currents flowing into that node is equal to the sum of currents flowing out of that node." But with a transistor laser some of the current goes to creating the laser beam—mixing charge conservation with energy conservation.

I don't know how to read this exactly.

I sure wish I could read the journal article!"

You respond that I am 'sloppy' in interpretation.

Ah well - Tom, you can't read.

PN - if the hat fits...

But I said journalists (in this case whoever wrote the EET article) are sloppy.

Also I said the scientists in this case are maybe going for self-publicising overly dramatic statements. (Or maybe they are just over-interpreted by scientifically illiterate journalists).

Anyway - your reputation aside - there is no scientific issue to debate on this thread as others have pointed out.

PNeilson CS10/5 wrote:

“Kirchhoff’s law takes care of balancing the charge, but it doesn’t take care of balancing the energies. The question is, how do you put it all together and represent it in circuit language?” "

Well this is a little more precise than the reporters language

Yes, that is better. He is endeavoring to find a model that incorporates both processes using "circuit language".

If you want understand more about the behaviour of the cCMBT I highly recommend the reading and comprehension of the transistor laser. For those of you who lack any training in basic transistor and diode operation, you may want to brush up on this,doing this will allow you to see the ckt model addition for the optical behaviour component.... although the treatment on the papers is easy to understand and the diagrams are very easy to follow.

Some excerpts below will "resonate" with some people in this web blog and does agree (there is a behavior trend even though there is a population difference and also the transistor model does not model 100% correctly the cCMBT and AL2O3 when it comes to refraction, reflection, drift and diffusion speeds, electron-hole recombination{Annihilation}, spatial distribution{I know lots of people are lost on this one in this site}, and efficiencies) in some very qualitatively respects with the results I'm seeing in one of my electro-photonic (electro-optic) cap models (obviously this paper is about a transistor-laser so the emphasis is in emitter current and lamp output behavior {laser} and NOT the maximization of accumulation of charge storage or qV as expressed in the model)...

But before the excerpt.. here is the std transistor electrical equivalent ckt with electrical Kirchhoff’s law applied at node N1.

and below is the same transistor with the additional modeling for the electrical-optical Kirchhoff’s law extended to include the electron and photon
contributions (see highlighted circle). The last pic shows the more detailed biasing of port current modeling you ought to know if you are a EE or a good physicist!

µwave transistor laser wrote:

Based on an earlier charge control analysis, we have constructed a microwave circuit model of a three-port quantum-well (QW) transistor laser (TL) by extending Kirchhoff’s law to include electron-photon interaction, to yield an electrical-optical form of Kirchhoff’s law. The TL circuit model includes both intrinsic device elements and extrinsic parasitic elements, and fits accurately measured microwave S-parameters up to 20 GHz and matches also measured eye-diagram data up to 13 Gb/s equipment-limited.

As said by many here, the model is just trying to incorporate the electrical (electron-holes), and photon optical behaviour into a single model to describe the operation of the Transistor-Laser (electrical current and light outputs).

µwave transistor laser wrote:

To include the laser dynamics in the model, the photon rate equation is expressed as:

I_stim/q = dN_ph/dt + Nph/τ_ph −γ I_sp/q


where q is the electronic charge, τ_ph is the photon lifetime in the resonator cavity, and γ is the proportion of spontaneous emission in the optical lasing mode. The ability of the resonator cavity to “store” photons (energy storage) can be treated as a “photon capacitor”. (Wut, What?:) By treating the photon population as a “charge” population, qN_ph=(C_p /q) X qV_p, a time-varying equivalent potential energy, qV_pin units of electron volt is defined across an equivalent “photon storage capacitance,” C_p /q in units of Coulomb per electron volt. Generation addition and emission of photons is treated as “charging” and “discharging” of the “photon capacitor.” The potential energy qV_p is thus directly proportional to the photon population, and hence to the optical output, L, of the device. By relating L to a potential energy, we are able to incorporate current IE=IB+IC (E-emitter, B=Base, C=Collector), charge and energy conservation preserved within the framework of Kirchhoff’s law.

Last edited Sun, 16 May 2010, 12:06pm by BigMig

Hi Mig - I think I am resonating, or is that just the Bombay?

An exciton is just an electron that has trapped a photon. A polariton is an exiton with a second trapped photon. A CMBT polariton is 4.4 eV per unit cell. 4.4 eV per unit cell makes a fully charged EESU.

So do we have a 'Photon Capacitor' a 'Exciton Capacitor' or a 'Polariton Capacitor'? Actually we have a 'Mixed States Capacitor' with all three states present at once in an EESU. The ratio of each changes with the amount of energy stored.

PNeilson CS10/5 wrote:

So do we have a 'Photon Capacitor' a 'Exciton Capacitor' or a 'Polariton Capacitor'? Actually we have a 'Mixed States Capacitor' with all three states present at once in an EESU. The ratio of each changes with the amount of energy stored.

Google search for "mixed state capacitor" returned your post, page 1, position 2 about 12 minutes after you posted.

google wanted to "fill in" the term "bipolar" after mixed states... thought you might get a kick out of that.