Why are you dishonestly trying to change the subject to "twisting" leads together, when you know full well that the discussion concerns mating the semiconductor layers?
In any case, does this mean that you're now retracting your original claim that, "Which, of course, makes my original statement, that a transistor was in a sense two diodes back-to-back, entirely correct"?
Absolutely not. Your transparent attempt at squirming out of your hypocritical and B.S. revision of the clear meaning of actuality does not work. I added another method of adjoining diodes since you cannot fathom soldering despite your alleged E.E. training. You could superglue the things togther if you like. They are still not a transistor. You claimed, counter to my statement that in a sense that a transistor was 2 diodes back to back, that a transistor was in actuality 2 transistors back 2 back. It is your claim that falls flat on its face. I merely challenged you to make a transistor out of 2 diodes in actuality as you claimed. And your red herring attempt at changing the discussion to mating semiconductor layers won't work. Here is the definition of the words again.
in a sense
adv : in some respects; "in a sense, language is like math" [syn: in a way]