The Student Room Group

AS Computing Question (Beginner)

I just started looking at the Logic gates and Boolean algebra chapter for the first time. I understand almost all of it but one thing that slightly confused me is the NOT function. I know that the output is the inverse of the input so I could work out truth tables but I don't really understand why this is the case. So why is the output the inverse of the input? Any simple explanations please. Thanks
Reply 1
:bump:
Original post by MissMyDawgs
I just started looking at the Logic gates and Boolean algebra chapter for the first time. I understand almost all of it but one thing that slightly confused me is the NOT function. I know that the output is the inverse of the input so I could work out truth tables but I don't really understand why this is the case. So why is the output the inverse of the input? Any simple explanations please. Thanks

I'm assuming you are asking from a logical perspective as opposed to how the function is physically implemented in electronics or switches etc?

Starting from the premise that there are only two states: 0 or 1, then

for any given input (i.e. 1 or 0) the output is NOT that which is input. i.e. it's the inverse of that which is input. Thus:

Output is 1 for an input of 0. i.e. 1 is NOT 0
Output is 0 for an input of 1. (0 is NOT 1)

Does that make sense?
Reply 3
Original post by uberteknik
I'm assuming you are asking from a logical perspective as opposed to how the function is physically implemented in electronics or switches etc?

Starting from the premise that there are only two states: 0 or 1, then

for any given input (i.e. 1 or 0) the output is NOT that which is input. i.e. it's the inverse of that which is input. Thus:

Output is 1 for an input of 0. i.e. 1 is NOT 0
Output is 0 for an input of 1. (0 is NOT 1)

Does that make sense?

Yeah I get it now. LOL I'm already stuck on something else ... I'm already considering dropping this. Anyway I'm stuck with De Morgan's Law. I'm probably doing it next lesson but I just wanted to read ahead but it isn't making much sense to me. Do you have any simple explanation? Also I'd like to know how they would ask a De Morgan's Law question in an exam.
Original post by MissMyDawgs
Yeah I get it now. LOL I'm already stuck on something else ... I'm already considering dropping this. Anyway I'm stuck with De Morgan's Law. I'm probably doing it next lesson but I just wanted to read ahead but it isn't making much sense to me. Do you have any simple explanation? Also I'd like to know how they would ask a De Morgan's Law question in an exam.

Ah. Don't give up. Logic is a bit tricky to get your head around at first, but it's not that bad. Like learning a musical instrument, you have to practice it a lot to get quick at it. Start by making sure you know what AND, OR, NAND, NOR are and then do questions until they become second nature. It's the same as when you learned to read. Every letter was a struggle at first and then words were hard to read. Now you don't even know you are doing it!

De Morgan states the properties of logical operators where:

NOT(A OR B) is proven to be the same as ((NOT A) AND (NOT B)); alternately:

NOT(A AND B) is proven to be the same as (NOT A) OR (NOT B).

These properties are exploited in the fabrication of Arithmetic and Logic (ALU's) functions of a microprocessor device or any physical processor device.

From simply using NOT and AND logic gates, all other complex logical functions including: NAND, OR, NOR, EXCLUSIVE OR, Half Adders, Full Adders etc, etc. can be fabricated. Large scale integration of these functions fabricates binary subtraction, multiplication, division operators etc.
(edited 10 years ago)
Reply 5
Original post by uberteknik
Ah. Don't give up. Logic is a bit tricky to get your head around at first, but it's not that bad. Like learning a musical instrument, you have to practice it a lot to get quick at it. Start by making sure you know what AND, OR, NAND, NOR are and then do questions until they become second nature. It's the same as when you learned to read. Every letter was a struggle at first and then words were hard to read. Now you don't even know you are doing it!

De Morgan states the properties of logical operators where:

NOT(A OR B) is proven to be the same as ((NOT A) AND (NOT B)); alternately:

NOT(A AND B) is proven to be the same as (NOT A) OR (NOT B).

These properties are exploited in the fabrication of Arithmetic and Logic (ALU's) functions of a microprocessor device or any physical processor device.

From simply using NOT and AND logic gates, all other complex logical functions including: NAND, OR, NOR, EXCLUSIVE OR, Half Adders, Full Adders etc, etc. can be fabricated. Large scale integration of these functions fabricates binary subtraction, multiplication, division operators etc.

Oh thanks I slightly understand what you are saying, I will see how I do next lesson in this mini test and see if there is still hope in me taking this.
Reply 6
Original post by uberteknik
Ah. Don't give up. Logic is a bit tricky to get your head around at first, but it's not that bad. Like learning a musical instrument, you have to practice it a lot to get quick at it. Start by making sure you know what AND, OR, NAND, NOR are and then do questions until they become second nature. It's the same as when you learned to read. Every letter was a struggle at first and then words were hard to read. Now you don't even know you are doing it!

De Morgan states the properties of logical operators where:

NOT(A OR B) is proven to be the same as ((NOT A) AND (NOT B)); alternately:

NOT(A AND B) is proven to be the same as (NOT A) OR (NOT B).

These properties are exploited in the fabrication of Arithmetic and Logic (ALU's) functions of a microprocessor device or any physical processor device.

From simply using NOT and AND logic gates, all other complex logical functions including: NAND, OR, NOR, EXCLUSIVE OR, Half Adders, Full Adders etc, etc. can be fabricated. Large scale integration of these functions fabricates binary subtraction, multiplication, division operators etc.

Haha there is hope I got 90% on the mini test ... I think De Morgan's law will be covered next so if I still dont understand parts of it ill ask you for help. Ty
Original post by MissMyDawgs
Haha there is hope I got 90% on the mini test ... I think De Morgan's law will be covered next so if I still dont understand parts of it ill ask you for help. Ty

Well done! :smile: The more you practice, the easier it gets!

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending