Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Simplifying the expression using Boolean Algebra into sum-of-products (SOP) expressions . refers to AND + refers to OR

Updated with new question

( (a + b) ∙ (a' + c') )' + (b + c')' + a∙b'∙c

= ( (a + b) ∙ (a' + c') )' + (b' . c) + a∙b'∙c

= (( a ∙ (a' + c') + b ∙ (a' + c') )' + (b' . c) + a∙b'∙c

= (( a ∙ a' + a ∙ c') + (a' . b + b ∙ c') )' + (b' . c) + a∙b'∙c

= (( a ∙ c') + (a' . b + b ∙ c') )' + (b' . c) + a∙b'∙c

= ( a ∙ c')' . (a'. b + b ∙ c')' + (b' . c) + a∙b'∙c

= ( a' + c) . (a + b' ∙ b' + c) + (b' . c) + a∙b'∙c

I am stuck here. How do I continue? Any help please?

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 1 down vote accepted

I’m going to omit the dots and just write $ab'$, for instance, instead of $a\cdot b'$. I think that your approach is reasonable down to here:

$$\big((ac')+(a'b + bc')\big)'+(b'c)+ab'c\;.$$

My next step would be to combine the last two terms: $b'c+ab'c=(1+a)b'c=b'c$. Now let’s worry about the first term. I think that I might do a little more manipulation inside before getting rid of the outer negation:

$$(ac')+(a'b+bc')=ac'+b(a'+c')\;,$$

so

$$\begin{align*} \big((ac')+(a'b + bc')\big)'&=\big(ac'+b(a'+c')\big)'\\ &=(ac')'\big(b(a'+c')\big)'\\ &=(a'+c)\big(b'+(a'+c')'\big)\\ &=(a'+c)(b'+ac)\;. \end{align*}$$

See what you can do from there.

However, you might be able to do better with a different start. Note that the original first term is $\big((a+b)(a'+c')\big)'$, which when expanded is going to have the very nice expression $(a'+c')'=ac$. Thus, we might want to start with

$$\begin{align*} \big((a+b)(a'+c')\big)'+(b+c')'+ab'c&=(a+b)'+ac+b'c+ab'c\\ &=a'b'+ac+b'c\;. \end{align*}$$

This can be manipulated in various ways, but none is an improvement.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks! :) I like your different start approach –  Lawrence Wong Feb 3 '13 at 8:03
    
@Lawrence: It is just a bit quicker, isn’t it? :-) You’re welcome! –  Brian M. Scott Feb 3 '13 at 8:05
    
Yes, definitely quicker and a lot shorter in the number of steps. :) –  Lawrence Wong Feb 3 '13 at 8:10

Let us simplify the first term: $$[(a+b).(a'+c')]'$$ $$=(a+b)'+(a'+c')'$$ $$=a'.b'+a.c$$

So the required simplified form is $$a'.b'+a.c+a.b'.c$$ $$=a'.b'+a.c.(1+b')$$ $$=a'.b'+a.c$$


Edit: I forgot the second term $(b+c')'$. So adding it, the final answer is $$a'.b'+b'.c+a.c$$

share|improve this answer
    
I have deleted/undeleted several times looking at @Brain M. Scott's result. I also do not know why the sentence "So the required simplified form is" is in bold font. –  Tapu Feb 3 '13 at 7:55
    
+1. It was in boldface because it was immediately above the dividing line; I’ve run into the problem myself in the past. Just insert a blank line between them, as I just did, and the boldface goes away. –  Brian M. Scott Feb 3 '13 at 8:13
    
Thanks! +1 to you too :) –  Tapu Feb 3 '13 at 8:18
    
You’re welcome! I remember how frustrated I was the first time it happened to me. –  Brian M. Scott Feb 3 '13 at 8:22

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.