Timeline for Reading the Boolean Expression for a Logic NAND Gate
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 19, 2021 at 19:10 | comment | added | jay | The other hand, (I thought too, that I did not explain enough), wonder if "(A & B & C) gives (/Q)" is more acceptable instead of "(A & B & C) gives something (and that is) NOT Q". I wanted describe there is an action of "gives/outputs" and the whole word, "NOT Q", is an objective noun . | |
| Aug 19, 2021 at 19:02 | comment | added | jay | A meant a "binary opinion" by an answer giving either 1 or 0. That is equivalent to " yes or no", but not "doesn't give Q", which can be taken as "may" (uncertain) give "X (don't care)" or /Q. "Don't care" is not considered as a binary answer. | |
| Aug 19, 2021 at 18:55 | comment | added | jay | @Cheryl, Thanks for accepting my answer. Meantime I am terribly sorry that my answer wasn't good enough. I will try to explain, but cannot promise to be enough. "[gives]" is an action, which is performed by a "function", which does the '&' operations, which is drawn as a "container", which is a shape of box with round on a side. continue.. | |
| Aug 19, 2021 at 18:38 | comment | added | Claire | Hi! I have trouble understanding what you mean by "[gives (the container/function with '&' operation)]" and "[NOT (the hollow dot)]". Would you mind explaining this? Also, why isn't "Not (A & B & C) but something else may give Q" a binary opinion? This seems binary to me as I interpret it saying that since (A & B & C) doesn't give Q, the opposite of it, NOT(A & B & C) is what gives Q. Any explanations would be appreciated! | |
| Aug 19, 2021 at 18:21 | vote | accept | Claire | ||
| Aug 17, 2021 at 21:33 | history | answered | jay | CC BY-SA 4.0 |