MHB How Can Algebraic Manipulation Prove the Consensus Property in Logic Circuits?

  • Thread starter Thread starter shamieh
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Manipulation
AI Thread Summary
Algebraic manipulation can prove the consensus property in logic circuits, specifically the equation xy + yz + x!z = xy + x!z. The key step involves recognizing that adding the term (x + x!) does not change the equation's truth value because x + x! equals true (T). This allows for the introduction of T into the equation, which simplifies the expression without altering its validity. Understanding this principle is crucial for applying algebraic rules effectively in logic circuit design. Mastery of these concepts enhances problem-solving skills in electrical engineering contexts.
shamieh
Messages
538
Reaction score
0
Some background: I am in EE 280 Design of Logic Circuits.

Problem: Use algebraic manipulation to prove that xy +yz +x!z = xy + x!z. (Note that this is the consensus property which is: xy + yz + x!z = xy + x!z)

+ mean OR, ! mean NOT.

Please help! I am lost. I do have the rules near me (x AND 1 = x etc.. as well as the "Single Variable Theorems") If someone could walk me through solving this that would be great and I would be forever thankful.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Try this:
$$xy+\bar{x}z+yz=xy+\bar{x}z+(x+\bar{x})yz.$$
 
Awesome, just figured it out. I solved and everything. I have a question tho. Where exactly does the rule (x + x!) come in play? I guess my question essentially is; how do I know that I can randomly put in a (x + x!) in the 2nd term. What is the property or rule that tells me I can do that legally? Sorry if this seems like a dumb question I'm just trying to understand what I'm actually doing versus just solving the equation.

Thanks again Ackbach,
-Sham(Ninja)
 
Well, $x+\bar{x}=\text{T}$, and $Tz=z$. So you can always multiply anything by $T$ and not change the truth value.
 
I'm taking a look at intuitionistic propositional logic (IPL). Basically it exclude Double Negation Elimination (DNE) from the set of axiom schemas replacing it with Ex falso quodlibet: ⊥ → p for any proposition p (including both atomic and composite propositions). In IPL, for instance, the Law of Excluded Middle (LEM) p ∨ ¬p is no longer a theorem. My question: aside from the logic formal perspective, is IPL supposed to model/address some specific "kind of world" ? Thanks.
I was reading a Bachelor thesis on Peano Arithmetic (PA). PA has the following axioms (not including the induction schema): $$\begin{align} & (A1) ~~~~ \forall x \neg (x + 1 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A2) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + 1 =y + 1 \to x = y) \nonumber \\ & (A3) ~~~~ \forall x (x + 0 = x) \nonumber \\ & (A4) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + (y +1) = (x + y ) + 1) \nonumber \\ & (A5) ~~~~ \forall x (x \cdot 0 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A6) ~~~~ \forall xy (x \cdot (y + 1) = (x \cdot y) + x) \nonumber...
Back
Top