Constructing a circuit from a Boolean expression

  • Context: Engineering 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Jim01
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Circuit Expression
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
4 replies · 3K views
Jim01
Messages
36
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Construct a circuit from the Boolean equation:

Homework Equations



P v (~P ^ ~Q)


The Attempt at a Solution



According to the textbook, I am supposed to go from right to left, working on the outermost part of the expression to the innermost part. I read this as saying that even though the outermost part of the expression is on the far left, it is where I begin. Is this correct? I come up with one OR gate, one AND gate and two NOT gates. I tried to draw this out using the keyboard but it doesn't format properly and so is incomprehensible. Here is what I came up with:


P goes into a NOT and comes out ~P. ~P goes into AND and comes out ~P ^ Q.
P goes into OR and comes out P v (~P ^ ~Q)

Q goes into NOT and comes out ~Q. ~Q goes into AND and comes out ~P ^ Q.

~P ^ Q goes into OR and comes out P v (~P ^ ~Q)

Am I on the right track?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is there a way of adding gates to my thread? I attempted to cut and paste my Viso drawing but that didn't work. It is a lot easier to see the circuit rather than read and try to visualize it.
 
jegues said:
If you use the proper syntax, wolframalpha will provide with a picture of the logic gates as well as a truth table.

For example,

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(x or y) and (x or !y)

Outstanding! Thank you for the information. After checking it I was right! I'm on the right track then. I was unsure whether or not I was interpreting the instructions correctly since most math has you doing everything inside the parenthesis first. It's counter-intuitive to do it last, so I was afraid I was misunderstanding.

Once again, thank you for your help.