I posted a similar question here, however I have another question regarding Venn diagrams and logic circuits...

In this problem:


Wouldn't the Venn diagram look something like this?

enter image description here

Because it simplifies to $B + AC$? And you can either have the $B$ region, the $AC$ region, or both?

However, apparently it's supposed to look something like this:

enter image description here

Which I don't understand... Because by the logic that you have $AB$ and $BC$, couldn't you justify saying that you can also shade in $A$, or shade in $C$ (by themselves)?

OR, does saying $A$ mean you shade in EVERYTHING that contains $A$? And only don't shade in the intersection if you had something that said $A * \overline{B}$?

  • $\begingroup$ I've edited your title and first paragraph, because this isn't a repost of your earlier question: it's a question about a different formula. $\endgroup$ Aug 4 '17 at 18:54

The misunderstanding here is the same as in your previous question. If $B$ is true, the formula is true whatever the values of $A$ and $C$ are. This means that the whole of the $B$ circle needs to be shaded. Shading just the part at the top corresponds to saying "The formula is true if $B$ is true and $A$ and $C$ are both false." That is certainly true, but it's not the whole story.

For example, your proposed shading says that the formula is false if $A$ is true, $B$ is true and $C$ is false. But the formula is true in that case! You must shade every region of the diagram that makes the formula true. In this case, that means every region in the $B$ circle, and also the intersection of the $A$ and $C$ circles. (Corresponding to, "The formula is true if $B$ is true, or if $A$ and $C$ are true, or both.")


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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