UTT- Boolean Algebra Equivalence

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ithryndil
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algebra Boolean algebra
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on demonstrating the equivalence of two Boolean expressions: LHS (x1'x3 + x1x2x3' + x1'x2 + x1x2') and RHS (x2'x3 + x1x3' + x2x3' + x1'x2x3). Participants suggest simplifying both sides using algebraic manipulation and Karnaugh maps. Key techniques include transforming expressions into disjunctive normal form (DNF) and utilizing fundamental product forms. The conversation emphasizes that equivalence can be shown through equivalent transformations rather than relying solely on truth tables.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Boolean algebra and equivalence
  • Familiarity with disjunctive normal form (DNF)
  • Knowledge of Karnaugh maps for simplification
  • Ability to manipulate Boolean expressions algebraically
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Boolean algebra simplification techniques
  • Learn how to construct and utilize Karnaugh maps
  • Explore the concept of disjunctive normal form (DNF) in depth
  • Practice transforming Boolean expressions through algebraic methods
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in computer science, electrical engineering, and mathematics who are working with Boolean algebra and logic design.

Ithryndil
Messages
142
Reaction score
0
Ok, I am having a difficult time with the following problem. I am to show that the two sides are equal.

x1'x3 + x1x2x3' +x1'x2+x1x2' = x2'x3+x1x3'+x2x3'+x1'x2x3

For the LHS I can simplify it to:
x2(x1'+x1x3') + x1'x3 + x1x2'
x2x1' + x2x3' + x1'x3 + x1x2'
x1'x3 + x2x3' + x1x2'

For the RHS I can simplify to:
x2(x3' + x1'x3) + x2'x3 + x1x3'
x2x3' + x2x1' + x2'x3 + x1x3'
x1'x3 + x1'x2 + x2x3

At this point I am stuck. I know that both sides should be equal. I have to do this algebraically, so using a truth table is out of it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In order to show two Boolean expressions to be equal, it suffices to show they can be transformed into equivalent forms. The most rudimentary way is to find their complete-sum-of-products form (aka disjunctive normal form DNF).

When the number of variable is small, a Karnaugh map is also useful.

Removing the distraction of subscripts by letting x = x1, y = x2, and z = x3:

You need to show that x'z + xyz' + x'y + xy' = y'z + xz' + yz' + x'yz.

When finding the "completed" version of a fundamental product recall that

ab = ab(1) = ab(c + c') = abc + abc'

and then delete extra identical summands.

Or show that both expressions have the same Karnaugh map.

\begin{array}{c|c|c|c|c}<br /> &amp; yz &amp; yz&#039; &amp; y&#039;z&#039; &amp; y&#039;z \\<br /> \hline<br /> x &amp; &amp; \checkmark &amp; \checkmark &amp; \checkmark \\<br /> x&#039; &amp; \checkmark &amp; \checkmark &amp; &amp; \checkmark \\<br /> \end{array}<br />

When the number of variables increases things get more difficult.

--Elucidus
 
I hope this isn't too late.
Also, I agree with ELUCIDUS about removing subscripts and making it easier, so I'll use his.

Hint:
You don't always have to minimize first. You can start out by expanding terms, such as:

X'Z = X'YZ + X'Y'Z
Then you can re-combine terms, then minimize. Try it!~

KM
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K