Westonci.ca makes finding answers easy, with a community of experts ready to provide you with the information you seek. Get immediate answers to your questions from a wide network of experienced professionals on our Q&A platform. Discover detailed answers to your questions from a wide network of experts on our comprehensive Q&A platform.
Sagot :
OK, I'll try this. But you have to be gentle with me, because it's 43 years
since I learned it, and I've never used it except for recreation. I just hope
that I don't make a fool of myself.
The logic function you want is: X = ( A + B ) ( B C )
-- ' X ' requires B in the second parentheses.
-- So in order for ' X ' to be true, the first parentheses depends only on A .
We can completely ignore the ' B ' there, because if ' B ' is true, then ' X '
is not.
-- So the whole function reduces to X = ( A ) ( B C ) = ( A B C )
If I recall my tool box from way back then, ( A B C ) = ( A + B + C ) .
That's a law named after somebody whose name escapes me,
but I think I've applied it correctly.
Anyway, as always happens, the function can be implemented in
two different fundamental ways, on account of this guy's law.
Both of them are presented in the attachment.

We hope you found this helpful. Feel free to come back anytime for more accurate answers and updated information. Thanks for using our platform. We aim to provide accurate and up-to-date answers to all your queries. Come back soon. Thank you for using Westonci.ca. Come back for more in-depth answers to all your queries.