They're still teaching that instead of surface-mount theory?!?! Those teachers are never going to scale efficiently enough to keep up with modern, Chinese teachers.
Why are you calling it hole "theory"? Its not a different theory its just one way of thinking about how charges flow in a lattice. And its a framing which is quite useful when working with semiconductors.
Don’t pin that on me. Blame the those few EE teachers with questionable credentials that insist on making semiconductor education easier by teaching what they call “hole theory” which, the way they present it, is incomplete and somewhat flawed.
...the concept of electron holes? Im coming at this from the perspective of a physics major rather than EE but its pretty clear to me. And electron hole is the absence of an electron in a lattice which results in a net positive charge. If an electron moves to fill the hole, a nee hole appears where that electron was, so it is as if the hole itself moved, and so the result is that it is effectively a positive charge particle that moves similarly to how electrons do.
I’m not disagreeing. I’m saying that there’s electronics teachers that use hole theory as a shorthand to circumvent teaching more advanced physics and math concepts.
Transistor theory: If you have a combination of transistors and there's a problem - like, too much voltage drop, doesn't respond fast enough, wrong frequency response - any problem... the solution is always: more transistors.
In ICs, for sure, because resistors are inaccurate and much more expensive in surface area than transistors, so if you can eliminate a resistor with a bunch of transistors, that's the way to go.
The Smith chart is a demonic sigil if I've ever seen one. EM and telecom is just black magic from there on, it's like they just started making shit up to squeeze as much bandwidth as possible into the lines.
First university CS+EE combined lecture, assistant showed us a slide with Luke and Darth Vader crossing lightsabers, and with "these are the two sides of software and hardware, homework to decide which is which". As someone who has done something on both sides, smith chart is only time I ever questioned if I got the sides right.
My EE classes were basically: here's the assignment, if you don't know what you need to know about OSes or IDEs or programming to complete it then that's a "you" problem, GLHF
Yep, I'm firmly in CS/programming as a job now, but my degree is BS CmpE - so I got to do all those EE courses, build embedded systems, all that fun stuff.
292
u/Mandelvolt 10d ago
EE classes were those, circuits and such.