Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Quick boolean algebra problem..help needed

  • 22-11-2006 6:54pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,236 ✭✭✭


    HI,
    I hope this is the right forum..
    Well I am just doing a bit of revising for boolean algebra and de morgans rule and came across this in an equation.. I cant seem to work out how part 1 = part 2 or if it is even correct? COuld someone please shed some light on it? See attachment.

    Thanks,
    Hakko


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,264 ✭✭✭✭Hobbes




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,236 ✭✭✭techguy


    thanks hobbes I knew there was a maths forums but it was tos up as to which forum to post in..


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,943 ✭✭✭Mutant_Fruit


    Well, you know the rule for boolean algebra? Break the line, change the sign.

    Also, you can add two "not's" on top of a problem without changing it. i.e. stick two more lines on top of the left hand problem so that it's
    not(not(not(NOT(A) + NOT(B) + C))) (works best if you write it down :p)

    Then just break one of the lines, change the signs of everything beneath the line that you broke. You can then remove any excess double-nots over individual letters (not(not(A))) = A, then solve the remainder using normal techniques.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,579 ✭✭✭Webmonkey


    It isn't a valid logic statement. They are not equal.

    And the breaking line changing sign is DeMorgans Theorm.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,943 ✭✭✭Mutant_Fruit


    Webmonkey wrote:
    It isn't a valid logic statement. They are not equal.
    I never tried actually solving it myself. I was too lazy to work it out :p
    And the breaking line changing sign is DeMorgans Theorm.
    I had forgotten the name of the rule, i just remembered the method. It's 2 years since i've solved these kind of questions ;)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,579 ✭✭✭Webmonkey


    :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,746 ✭✭✭✭Misticles


    i got part 1 to equal part 2


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,943 ✭✭✭Mutant_Fruit


    Try putting in
    A = 1
    B = 1
    C = 0

    The left side evaluates to true, the right side evaluates to false (if i'm doing this right).


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,579 ✭✭✭Webmonkey


    Yep exact same for me


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,236 ✭✭✭techguy


    Thanks guys, the notes I got 1st time round were wrong..
    it should be:
    (' = not)
    (A'+B'+AC)' = (B'+A'+C)' (not de morgans but another rule..)


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,943 ✭✭✭Mutant_Fruit


    (A'+B'+AC)' = (B'+A'+C)'

    Break it down to just this:
    A' + AC = A' + C

    Look at the left side, here there's both an A and A'. If A is true, the output relies solely on C being true or false. If A is false, the output is false no matter what C is.

    So, you can break this down to just A' + AC = A' + C as was shown above. That make sense?

    Simlarly, what would A'B + AB' break down into? *hopes he got the example right*


Advertisement