Replies to post #203669 on Lightwave Logic Inc (LWLG)

[prototype_101]

Newbies, ECOC Slide 20 is the ONLY information you need to understand to know LWLG is a incredible buying opportunity!!

https://api.mziq.com/mzfilemanager/v2/d/307dbc8b-e212-48ba-9968-8cef3f6b5188/0d5d1e3e-2052-00d8-bb2f-2b7a2adf0310?origin=1

On the LEFT is a comparison of LWLG's technology to the PRESUMED #1 COMPETITIVE THREAT TFLN

On the RIGHT is a comparison the ONLY OTHER COMMERCIAL POLYMER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY NLM

To make it EASY PEASY for you, BOTH of these SUPPOSED BEST COMPETITORS PALE BY COMPARISON!!!!!

Couple this with this recent Paper with authors from Cisco, Intel, and Arista (Andy B) which points out just how crappy TFLN's position is today in being ready to commercialize!! TFLN is a joke really!!! Even the #1 TFLN Development company recently said it may take 3 or more years from now to be able to scale volume of TFLN modulators!!! here from the Paper

“For monolithic TFLN modulators and PICs, 150 mm wafer is the largest size for product presently. Limited wafer size, large device footprint, relatively high material cost, and thin-film uniformity contribute a large portion of the chip cost. Although the chip fabrication is not overly complex, uniform waveguide formation for ultra-low loss operation is not trivial, which necessitates optimized photolithography, etching technology, and post-fabrication processes. Additionally, long-term DC drift remains a challenge for TFLN. To make these modulators commercially viable and reliable, thermally or electrically phase control is a must.

TFLN modulators heterogeneously integrated with silicon or Si3N4 are still in the R&D stage. Similar to III-V-on-silicon heterogeneous integration, TFLN integration occurs towards the back-end-of-line (BEOL) process and requires specialized processing tools along with stringent cross-contamination controls, especially if large-wafer scale processing is involved. The TFLN transfer step is critical for achieving high yield and optimal device performance.”

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/10666944/references#references

[MarcoPolo4]

Wow GP, you really are wound up. This is the most volume of rhetoric I have see you post. It is a good example of the old saying, "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit".

Here you go again lumping Perkinamine with other polymers from other sources. I don't argue that TFLN has less insertion loss than polymers from sources other than LWLG. Photostability for Perkinamine is excellent as seen on slide 23 of slide deck 2024 ECOC (same as 2023 ECOC slide 31). The value hovers around 1 and stays fairly consistent over time.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41566-023-01161-9

This paper discusses the use of Perkinamine 3, a specific type of Perkinamine chromophore, in plasmonic modulators. While it doesn't directly provide insertion loss values for the polymer itself, it mentions that the on-chip insertion losses (ILPB) of the devices using this polymer are as low as 1.2 dB.

Insertion loss can vary depending on factors like the specific device architecture, fabrication process, and/ or operating wavelength. In other words, the value can be up or down depending on the variables.

Here is a post from a few weeks back on the issue of insertion loss. It requires some inferences on my part but it fits the idea that Perkinamine insertion loss is around 1. This might interest others more so than yourself because it is an exercise in following the breadcrumbs.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=175166686

[KCCO7913]

Did you even look at the sources there?

LWLG's 200G/1v modulator has fiber-to-fiber insertion loss of 4-5db per the engineer in the lab who made that comment in front of ~20 people.

The plasmonic/polymer modulator just published by Polariton was what, 1.5db total?

Just last week HyperLight had a slide at PECC with some data on their modulator and the EXCESS insertion loss was 6db.

Use your fancy AI to explain to you the difference between total insertion loss and excess insertion loss. HyperLight didn't even note their total insertion loss but their EXCESS was still higher than LWLG's TOTAL.

Twig and berries, Matty? You sayin' I got small junk?!