> Is the . dot a multiplication, what I would expect to be '*'? Yes, I used "." for std basic multiplication. (No vectors harmed in the writing of that formula). The less keen would build a system and derive K overall from measurement :;= -) > It's been too long since studying or using any semiconductor theory. =A0I= s > q =3D electron charge a constant? A far more profound question than may at first be obvious :-). A: Only if the fine structure constant is constant and maybe not then. If not, the sky is falling and I'm off to see the king. (Does anyone want to buy an acorn?). There is ongoing uncertainty about the constancy of the F.S.C. and whether it is spatially isotropic across the universe. But, for we mere mortals, it can be assumed that all of the current physical constants are so. At least close enough to constant across ranges of time and space liable to be encountered in terrestial applications. FSC =3D alpha =3D 2.Pi.q^2 / (CP) q =3D electron charge C =3D light speed !!!!!!!!!!!! P =3D Planck's constant http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_principle They were at it in 1962 :-) "The significance of spatial isotropy." http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PR/v127/i2/p629_1 <- Ref http://astrophysics.fic.uni.lodz.pl/100yrs/pdf/07/026.pdf <-paper http://www.ebtx.com/ntx/ntx215.htm <- Danger Will Robinson " ... using the Bekenstein-Sandvik-Barrow-Magueijo (BSBM) theory. ... dark energy ..." Must be good, then. http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0401631 On Feynman (long ago) & Webb & King (2010) on FSC NB FSB <> FSM but it may sometimes be hard to tell :-). http://www.economist.com/node/16930866 > I know the rest are, except for the > ideality factor, which I would hope are in the spec sheet or can be > calculated empirically. I doubt if many spec sheets cite non a non-ideality factor, alas. Russell --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .