| Logical Operator |
Article Index for Logical |
Shopping Logical |
Website Links For Logical |
Information AboutLogical Operator |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT LOGICAL CONNECTIVE | |
| boolean algebra | |
| logic | |
| SHOPPER'S DELIGHT | |
|
For example, considering the Assertion s "It's raining", and "I'm inside", we can form the compound assertions "it's raining, ''and'' I'm inside" or "it's ''not'' raining" or "''if'' it's raining, ''then'' I'm inside." A new statement or proposition combining two statements is called a compound statement or '''compound proposition'''. The basic operators are " Not " (¬ or ~), " And " (∧, , or &), " Or " (∨), " Conditional " (→ or ⊃), and " Biconditional " ( Iff ) (↔). "Not" is a Unary Operator —it takes a single term (¬ P). The rest are Binary Operators , taking two terms to make a compound statement (P ∧ Q, P ∨ Q, P → Q, P ↔ Q). Note the similarity between the symbols for "and" () and Set-theoretic Intersection (∩); likewise for "or" (∨) and Set-theoretic Union (∪). This is not a coincidence: the definition of the intersection uses "and" and the definition of union uses "or". Truth Tables for these connectives: In order to reduce the number of necessary parentheses, one introduces precedence rules: ¬ has higher precedence than ∧, ∧ higher than ∨, and ∨ higher than →. So for example, P ∨ Q ∧ ¬ R → S is short for (P ∨ (Q ∧ (¬ R))) → S. Not all of these operators are necessary for a full-blooded logical calculus. Certain compound statements are Logically Equivalent . For example, ¬ P ∨ Q is logically equivalent to P → Q;. So the conditional operator "→" is not necessary if you have "¬" (not) and "∨" (or). For the sake of convenience (and brevity), only the five most-commonly used operators (in math) are listed above. One can also consider other connectives, such as NAND ("not-and"), XOR ("not-biconditional"), and NOR ("not-or"). Logical operators are implemented as Logic Gate s in Digital Circuit s. Practically all digital circuits (the major exception is DRAM ) are built up from NAND , NOR , NOT , and Transmission Gate s. NAND and NOR gates with 3 or more inputs rather than the usual 2 inputs are fairly common, although they are logically equivalent to a cascade of 2-input gates. All other operators are implemented by breaking them down into a logically equivalent combination of 2 or more of the above logic gates. If you throw away all the operators that are not necessary, what operators are you left with? Which conditionals are the crucial must-have ones? Surprisingly, there is more than one answer to that question.
The "logical equivalence" of "NAND alone", "NOR alone", and "NOT and AND" is similar to Turing Equivalence . Is some new technology (such as Reversible Computing , Clockless Logic , Quantum Dots computing, or Tinker Toys) "logically complete", in that it can be used to build computers that can do all the sorts of computation that CMOS -based computers can do? If it can implement the NAND operator, only then is it logically complete. REFERENCES SEE ALSO
|