Book Shaums BooleanAlgebraMendelson

SCHAUM’S OUTLlNE OF
THEORY AND PROBLEMS
OF
BOOLEAN ALGEBRA
and
SWITCHING CIRCUITS
BY
ELLIOTT MENDELSON, Ph.D.
Professor of Mathematics
Queens College
City University of New York
SCHAUM’S OUTLINE SERIES

MCGRAW-HILL BOOK COMPANY
New York, St. Louis, San Francisco, London, Sydney, Toronto, Mexico, and Panama
Copyright @ 1970 by McGraw-Hill, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Printed in the
United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the
prior written permission of the publisher.
07-041460-2
1234567890 SHSH 7543210

To Julia, Hilary, and Peter
Preface
This book is devoted to two separate, but related, topics: (1) the synthesis and
simplification of switching and logic circuits, and (2) the theory of Boolean algebras.
Those people whose primary interest is in switching and logic circuits can read
Chapter 4 immediately after a quick perusal of Chapter 1. We have confined our
treatment of switching and logic circuits to combinational circuits, i.e. circuits in
which the outputs at a given time depend only on the present value of the inputs and
not upon the previous values of the inputs. The extensive theory of sequential circuits,
in which the outputs depend also upon the history of the inputs, may be pursued by
the reader in Introduction to Switching Theory and Logical Design by F. J. Hill and
G. R. Peterson (reference 34, page 202), Zntroduction to Switching and Automata
Theory by M. A. Harrison (ref. 33, page 202), and other textbooks on switching theory.
The treatment of Boolean algebras is somewhat deeper than in most elementary
texts. It can serve as an introduction to graduate-level books such as Boolean Algebras
by R. Sikorski (ref. 148, page 207) and Lectures on Boolean Algebras by P. R. Halmos
(ref. 116, page 207).
There is no prerequisite for the reading of this book. Each chapter begins with
clear statements of pertinent definitions, principles and theorems together with illus-
trative and other descriptive material. This is followed by graded sets of solved and
supplementary problems. The solved problems serve to illustrate and amplify the
theory, bring into sharp focus those fine points without which the student continually
feels himself on unsafe ground, and provide the repetition of basic principles so vital
to effective learning. A few problems which involve modern algebra or point-set
topology are clearly labeled. The supplementary problems serve as a complete review
of the material of each chapter. Difficult problems are identified by a superscript D
following the problem number.
The extensive bibliography at the end of the book is divided into two parts, the
first on Switching Circuits, Logic Circuits and Minimization, and the second on
Boolean Algebras and Related Topics. It was designed for browsing. We have listed
many articles and books not explicitly referred to in the body of the text in order to
give the reader the opportunity to delve further into the literature on his own.
Queens College ELLIOTT MENDELSON

July 1970
CONTENTS
Page
Chapter 1 THE ALGEBRA OF LOGIC
1.1 Truth-Functional Operations ............................................ 1

1.2 Connectives ............................................................ 4
1.3 Statement Forms ...................................................... 4
1.4 Parentheses ............................................................ 5
1.5 Truth Tables .......................................................... 6
1.6 Tautologies and Contradictions .......................................... 7
1.7 Logical Implication and Equivalence .................................... 9
1.8 Disjunctive Normal Form .............................................. 12
1.9 Adequate Systems of Connectives ........................................ 15
Chapter 2 THE ALGEBRA OF SETS
2.1 Sets .................................................................. 30

2.2 Equality and Inclusion of Sets. Subsets ................................ 31
2.3 Null Set. Number of Subsets .......................................... 31
2.4 Union ................................................................ 32
2.5 Intersection ............................................................ 33
2.6 Difference and Symmetric Difference .................................... 34
2.7 Universal Set. Complement ............................................ 35
2.8 Derivations of Relations among Sets .................................... 36
2.9 Propositional Logic and the Algebra of Sets .............................. 37
2.10 Ordered Pairs. Functions .............................................. 38
2.11 Finite, Infinite, Denumerable, and Countable Sets ........................ 39
2.12 Fields of Sets .......................................................... 39
2.13 Number of Elements in a Finite Set .................................... 40
Chapter 3 BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS
3.1 Operations ............................................................ 52

3.2 Axioms for a Boolean Algebra .......................................... 52
3.3 Subalgebras .......................................................... 56
3.4 Partial Orders ........................................................ 57
3.5 Boolean Expressions and Functions. Normal Forms ...................... 60
3.6 Isomorphisms .......................................................... 62
3.7 Boolean Algebras and Propositional Logic ................................ 63
CONTENTS
Page
Chapter 4 SWITCHING CIRCUITS AND LOGIC CIRCUITS
4.1 Switching Circuits ...................................................... 71

4.2 Simplification of Circuits .............................................. 72
4.3 Bridge Circuits ........................................................ 74
4.4 Logic Circuits ........................................................ 75
4.5 The Binary Number System ........................................... 77
4.6 Multiple Output Logic Circuits .......................................... 78
4.7 Minimization .......................................................... 80

4.8 Don’t Care Conditions .................................................. 82
4.9 Minimal Disjunctive Normal Forms ...................................... 84
4.10 Prime Implicants ...................................................... 84
4.11 The Quine-McCluskey Method for Finding All Prime Implicants .......... 86
4.12 Prime Implicant Tables ................................................ 90

4.13 Minimizing with Don’t Care Conditions .................................. 93
4.14 The Consensus Method for Finding Prime Implicants ...................... 94
4.15 Finding Minimal Dnf’s by the Consensus Method .......................... 96
4.16 Karnaugh Maps ........................................................ 98
4.17 Karnaugh Maps with Don’t Care Conditions .............................. 106
4.18 Minimal Dnf’s or Cnf’s ................................................ 107
Chapter 5 TOPICS IN THE THEORY OF BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS
5.1 Lattices .............................................................. 133

5.2 Atoms ................................................................ 135
5.3 Symmetric Difference. Boolean Rings .................................... 137
5.4 Alternative Axiomatizations ............................................ 140
5.5 Ideals ................................................................ 143
@5.6 Quotient Algebras ...................................................... 146
5.7 The Boolean Representation Theorem .................................... 148
5.8 Infinite Meets and Joins ................................................ 149
5.9 Duality .............................................................. 151
5.10 Infinite Distributivity .................................................. 151
5.11 m-Completeness ........................................................ 153
Appendix A ELIMINATION OF PARENTHESES ....................................... 190
Appendix B PARENTHESIS-FREE NOTATION ........................................ 195
Appendix C THE AXIOM OF CHOICE IMPLIES ZORN’S LEMMA .................... 1%
Appendix D A LATTICE-THEORETIC PROOF OF THE SCHRijDER-BERNSTEIN THEOREM 200
BlBLlOGRAPHY ........................................................ 201
INDEX.. ............................................................... 209
INDEX OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS ........................... 213

Chapter 1
The Algebra of logic
1.1 TRUTH-FUNCTIONAL OPERATIONS

There are many ways of operating on propositions to form new propositions. We shall
limit ourselves to those operations on propositions which are most relevant to mathematics
and science, namely, to truth-functional operations. An operation is said to be truth-
functional if the truth value (truth or falsity) of the resulting proposition is determined
by the truth values of the propositions from which it is constructed. The investigation of
truth-functional operations is called the propositional calculus, or, in old-fashioned
terminology, the algebra of logic, although its subject matter forms only a small and
atypically simple branch of modern mathematical logic.
Negation
Negation is the simplest common example of a truth-functional operation. If A is a
proposition, then its denial, not-A, is true when A is false and false when A is true. We shall
use a special sign 1 to stand for negation. Thus, 1 A is the proposition which asserts the
denial of A. The relation between the truth values of 1 A and A can be made explicit by a
diagram called a truth table.
A IlA
T F
l-
F T
Fig. l-l
In this truth table, the column under A gives the two possible truth values T (truth)
and F (falsity) of A. Each entry in the column under 1 A gives the truth value of 1 A
corresponding to the truth value of A in the same row.
Con junction
Another truth-functional operation about which little discussion is necessary is con-
junction. We shall use A & B to stand for the conjunction (A and B). The truth table
for & is
A 1 B 1 A&l
T T T
F T F
T F F
F F F
Fig. 1-2
1
2 THE ALGEBRA OF LOGIC [CHAP. 1
There are four possible assignments of truth values to A and B. Hence there are four rows
in the truth table. The only row in which A & B has the value T is the first row, where each
of A and B is true.
Disjunction
The use of the word “or” in English is ambiguous. Sometimes, “A or B”t means that
at least one of A and B is true, but that both A and B may be true. This is the inclusive
usage of “or”. Thus to explain someone’s success one might say “he is very smart or he
is very lucky”, and this clearly does not exclude the possibility that he is both smart and
lucky. The inclusive usage of “or” is often rendered in legal documents by the expression
“and/or”.
Sometimes the word “or” is used in an exclusive sense. For example, “Either I will go
skating this afternoon or I will stay at home to study this afternoon” clearly means that I
will not both go skating and stay home to study this afternoon. Whether the exclusive usage
is intended by the speaker or is merely inferred by the listener is often difficult to determine
from the sentence itself.
In any case, the ambiguity in usage of the word “or” is something that we cannot allow
in a language intended for scientific applications. It is necessary to employ distinct symbols
for the different meanings of “or”, and it turns out to be more convenient to introduce
a special symbol for the inclusive usage, since this occurs more frequently in mathematical
assertions.tt
“A v B” shall stand for “A or B or both”. Thus in its truth table (Fig. 1-3) the only case
where A v B is false is the case where both A and B are false. The expression A v B will be
called a disjunction (of A and B).
A B Avl
T T T
F T T
T F T
i-t F F F
Fig. 1-3
Conditionals
In mathematics, expressions of the form “If A then B” occur so often that it is necessary
to understand the corresponding truth-functional operation. It is obvious that, when A is T
and B is F, “If A then B” must be F. But in natural languages (like English) there is no
established usage in the other cases (when A is F, or when both A and B are T). In fact
when the meanings of A and B are not related (such as in “If the price of milk is 2% per
quart, then high tide is at 8:OO P.M. today”), the expression “If A then B” is not regarded
as having any meaning at all.
tstrictly speaking, we should employ quotation marks whenever we are talking about an expression
rather than using it. However, this would sometimes get the reader lost in a sea of quotation marks,
and we adopt instead the practice of omitting quotation marks whenever misunderstanding is improbable.
ttIn some natural languages, there are different words for the inclusive and exclusive “or”. For example,
in Latin, “vel” is used in the inclusive sense, while “aut” is used in the exclusive sense.
CHAP. 11 THE ALGEBRA OF LOGIC 3
Thus if we wish to regard “If A then B” as truth-functional (i.e. the truth value must
be determined by those of A and B), we shall have to go beyond ordinary usage. To this
end we first introduce + as a symbol for the new operation. Thus we shall write “A + B”
instead of “If A then B”. A + B is called a conditional with antecedent A and consequent B.
The truth table for + contains so far only one entry, in the third row.
A B A-B
T T
F T
T F F
t F F
Fig. 1-4
As a guideline for deciding how to fill in the rest of the truth table, we can turn to
“If (C & D) then C”, which seems to be a proposition which should always be true. When
C is T and D is F, (C & D) is F. Thus the second line of our truth table should be !I’(since
(C & D) is F, C is T, and (If (C & D) then C) is T). Likewise when C is F and D is F,
(C & D) is F. Hence the fourth line should be T. Finally, when C is T and D is T, (C & D)
is T, and the first line should be T. We arrive at the following truth table:
T F Ii
F I F I T
Fig. 1-5
A + B is F when and only when A is T and B is F.,

To make the meaning of A --, B somewhat clearer, notice that A + B and (1 A) v B always
have the same truth value. (J ust consider each of the four possible assignments of truth
values to A and B.) Thus the intuitive meaning of A + B is “not-A or B”. This is precisely
the meaning which is given to “If A then B” in contemporary mathematics.
A proposition A --, B is T whenever A is F, irrespective of the truth value of B. Notice

also that A + B is automatically T whenever B is T, without regard to the truth value of A.
In these two cases, one sometimes says that A --, B is Ctivially true by virtue of the falsity
of A or the truth of B.
Example 1.1.
The propositions 2 + 2 = 5 + 1 # 1 and 2 + 2 = 6 + 1 = 1 are both trivially true, since 2 + 2 = 6
is false.
Biconditionals
At this time we shall introduce a special symbol for just one more truth-functional
operation: A if and only if B. Let A c* B stand for “A if and only if B”, where we under-
stand the latter expression to mean that A and B have the same truth value (i.e. if A is T,
so is B, and vice versa). This gives rise to the truth table:
F T F
T F F
F F T
Fig.l-6
A proposition of the form A t, B is called a biconditional. Notice that A t) B always takes

the same truth value as (A + B) & (B + A) ; this is reflected in the mathematical practice of
deriving a biconditional A t) B by proving A + B and B + A separately.
1.2 CONNECTIVES
Up to this point, we have selected five truth-functional operations and introduced special
symbols for them: 1, &, v, J, t). Of course if we limit ourselves only to two variables,
then there are 24 = 16 different truth-functional operations. With two variables, a truth
table has four rows:
A B
T T -
F T -
T F -
t-tF F -
Fig. l-7
A truth-functional operation can have either T or F in each row. Hence there are 2 2 *2 *2
??
possible binary truth-functional operations.

Corresponding to any truth-functional operation (i.e. to any truth table) we can introduce
a special symbol, called a connective, to indicate that operation. Thus the symbols
1, &, V, +, tj are connectives. These five connectives will suffice for all practical purposes.
Example1.2.
The operationcorrespondingto the exclusiveusage of “or” could be designatedby a connective+ ,
having as its truth table:
A B AtB
T T F
F T T
T F T
i-tF F F
Fig. l-8
1.3 STATEMENT FORMS

To study the properties of truth-functional operations we introduce the following notions.
By a statement form (in the connectives 1, &, v, +, H) we mean any expression built
up from the statement letters A, B, C, . . ., Al, B1, Cl, . . . by a finite number of applications
of the connectives 1, &, V, +, c) . More precisely, an expression is a statement form if it
can shown to be one by means of the following two rules:
CHAP. l] THE ALGEBRA OF LOGIC 5
(1) All statement letters (with or without positive integral subscripts) are statement
forms.
(2) If A and B are statement forms, so are (1 A), (A & B), (A v B), (A + B), and (At, B).t
Example 1.3.
Examples of statement forms:
(i) (A + (B v (C & (TA)))); (ii) (l(A e (lB,))); (iii) (( l( IA,)) + (A2 + A,)).
Clearly we can talk about statement forms in any given set of connectives (instead of
just 1, &, V, +, e) by using the given connectives in clause (2) of the definition.
1.4 PARENTHESES
The need for parentheses in writing statement forms seems obvious. An expression
such as A v B & C might mean either ((A v B) & C) or (A v (B & C)), and these two statement
forms are not, in any sense, equivalent.
While parentheses are necessary, there are many cases in which some parentheses may
be conveniently and unambiguously omitted. For that purpose, we adopt the following
conventions for omission of parentheses.
(1) Every statement form other than a statement letter has an outer pair of parentheses.
We may omit this outer pair without any danger of ambiguity. Thus instead of
((A v B) 4%(1 C)), we write (A v B) & (1 C).
(2) We omit the pair of parentheses around a denial (1 A). Thus instead of (1 A) v C, we
write 1 A v C. This cannot be confused with 1 (A v C), since the parentheses will not
be dropped from the latter. As another example consider (A &B) v (l(l(1 B))). This
becomes (A &B) v 111 B.
(3) For any binary connective, we adopt the principle of association to the left. For
example, A & B & C will stand for (A & B) & C, and A + B + C will stand for (A + B) + C.
Example 1.4.
Applying (l)-(3) above, the statement forms in the column on the left below are reduced to the equiva-
lent expressions on the right.
((l(l@&C))) v (1‘4)) ll(A&C)v 1A
((A v ( -9) 81 (C 8~ ( 1A))) (Av IB) & (C&z -IA)
(((A v t-14) 8~ C) & (1A)) (Av-IB)&C& 1A
((1A) + (B -+ t-164 v C)))) lA+(B+ l(AvC))
More far-reaching conventions for omitting parentheses are presented in Appendix A.

In addition, Appendix B contains a method of rewriting statement forms so that no
parentheses are required at all.
tAn even more rigorous definition is: B is a statement form if and only if there is a finite sequence A,, . . .,
A,, such that
(1) A,, is B;
(2) if 1 L i f 72, then either Ai is a statement letter or there exist j, k < i such that Ai is (1Aj)
or Ai is (Aj Jz Ak) or Ai is (Ajv Ak) or Ai is (Aj + Ak) or Ai is (Ajt)Ak).
1.5 TRUTH TABLES

Every statement form A defines a truth-function: for every assignment of truth values
to the statement letters in A, we can calculate the corresponding truth value of A itself.
This calculation can be exhibited by means of a truth table.
Example 1.5.
The statement form (1A v B) * A has the truth table
Fig. 1-9
Each row corresponds to an assignment of truth values to the statement letters. The columns give the
corresponding truth values for the statement forms occurring in the step-by-step construction of the
given statement form.
Example 1.6.
The statement form (A v (B & C)) + B has the truth table
B C B&C A v (B KzC) (A v (B 13%

C)) + B
- -
T T T T T
T T T T T
F T F T F
F T F F T
T F F T T
T F F F T
F F F T F
F F F F T
Fig. l-10
When there are three statement letters, notice that the truth table has eight rows. In
general, when there are n statement letters, there are 2% rows in the truth table, since
there are two possibilities, T or F, for each statement letter.
Abbreviated Truth Tables

By the principal connective of a statement form (other than a statement letter), we mean
the last connective used in the construction of the statement form. For example, (A v B) + C
has --*as its principal connective, A v (B + C) has v as its principal connective, and 1 (A v B)
has 1 as its principal connective.
There is a way of abbreviating truth tables so as to make the computations shorter.

We just write down the given statement form once, and, instead of devoting a separate
column to each statement form forming a part of the given statement form, we write the
truth value of every such part under the principal connective of that part.
Example 1.7.
Abbreviated truth table for (1A v B) f, A. We begin with Fig. l-11. Notice that each occurrence
of a statement letter requires a repetition of the truth assignment for that letter.
(IA v B) t) A
T T T
F T F
T F T
F F F
Fig. l-11
Then the negation is handled:

(1A v B) - A
FT T T
TF T F
FT F T
TF F F
followed by the disjunction

(-iA v B) t) A
FTTT T
TF TT F
FT FF T
TFTF F
and, finally, the biconditional

(1AvB) *A
FTTT T T
TFTT F F
FTFF F T
TFTF F F
Of course our use of four separate diagrams was only for the sake of illustration. In practice all the
work can be carried out in one diagram.
1.6 TAUTOLOGIES AND CONTRADICTIONS

A statement form A is said to be a tautology if it takes the value T for all assignments
of truth values to its statement letters. Clearly A is a tautology if and only if the column
under A in its truth table contains only T’s.
Example 1.8. A + A is a tautology.

A A-+A
T T
t F T
Fig. 1-12
Example 1.9. A v IA is a tautology.
,-j-yy
Fig. 1-13
Example 1.10. (A v B) H (B v A) is a tautology.
B AvB BvA
I-
T T
T T
F T
F F
Fig. 1-14
Example 1.11. [A & (B v C)] c) [(A &B) v (A &C)] is a tauto1ogy.t

A
B C BvC A & (B v C) A&B A&C (A&B)v(A&C)

- -
T T T T T T
T T T F F F
F T T T T T
F T T F F F
T F T T F T
T F T F F F
F F F F F F
F F F F F F
Fig. 1-15
Theorem 1.1. If K is a tautology, and statement forms A, B, C, . . . are substituted for the
statement letters A, B, C, . . . of K (the same statement form replacing all
occurrences of a statement letter), then the resulting statement form K# is
a tautology.
Example 1.12.
(A v B) * (B v A) is a tautology. Replace A by (B v C) and simultaneously replace B by A. The
new statement form [(B v C) v A] t) [A v (B v C)] is a tautology.
Proof of Theorem 1 .l. K determines a truth-function f(A, B, C, . . .) which always takes

the value T no matter what the truth values of A, B, C, . . . may be. Let gl, g2, g3, . . . be the
truth-functions determined by A, B, C, . . . . Then the truth-function determined by K#
must have the form f# = f(gl(. . .),g2(. . .),g3(. . .), . . .), and, since f always takes the value
T, f# also always takes the value T. )
A contradiction is a statement form which always takes the value F. Hence A is a

contradiction if and only if 1 A is a tautology, and A is a tautology if and only if 1 A is a
contradiction.
Example 1.13. A & 1A is a contradiction.
Fig. 1-16
*In writing this statement form, we have replaced some parentheses by brackets to improve legibility.
For the samepurpose, we also shall use t-aces.
Example 1.14. A * 1A is a contradiction.
Fig. 1-17
Example 1.15. (A v B) & 1A & 1 B is a contradiction.
/B 1 1AI -II? i IAvRj&e.A t (AvR\&IA&-IR
Fig. 1-18
1.7 LOGICAL IMPLICATION AND EQUIVALENCE

We say that a statement form A logically implies a statement form B if and only if every
assignment of truth values making A true also makes B true.
Example 1.16. A logically implies A.
Example 1.17. A logically implies A v B. For, whenever A is true, A v B also must be true.
Example 1.18. A & B logically implies A.
Theorem 1.2. A logically implies B if and only if A + B is a tautology.
Proof. A logically implies B if and only if, whenever A is true, B must also be true.
Therefore A logically implies B if and only if it is never the case that A is true and B is
false. But the latter assertion means that A + B is never false, i.e. that A + B is a tautology. )
Since we can ‘effectively determine by a truth table whether a given statement form is a
tautology, Theorem 1.2 provides us with an effective procedure for checking whether A
logically implies B.
Example 1.19. Show that (A + B) + A logically implies A.

Proof. Fig. 1-19 shows that ((A + B) + A) --f A is a tautology.
..iA~i(A~~i((‘~B)~A
Fig. 1-19
Statement forms A and B are called logically equivalent if and only if A and B always
take the same truth value for any truth assignment to the statement letters. Clearly this
means that A and B have the same entries in the last column of their truth tables.
10 THE ALGEBRA OF LOGIC [CHAP.1
Example 1.20. A ++I3 is logically equivalent to (A + B) & (B + A).
Fig. l-20
Theorem 1.3. A and B are logically equivalent if and only if A t) B is a tautology.
Proof. A t) B is T when and only when A and B have the same truth value. Hence
A e B is a tautology (i.e. always takes the value T) if and only if A and B always have the
same truth value (i.e. are logically equivalent). )
Example 1.21. A + (I? + C) is logically equivalent to (A t&B) + C.

Proof. [A + (B + C)] e [(A &B) + C] is a tautology as shown in Fig. 1-21.
B A 4 (B + C) A&B 1 (A&B)+C [A + (B + C)] t) [(A &B) -+ C]

- I
T T T
T F T
F F T
F F T
T T F
T F T
F F T
F F T
Fig. 1-21
Corollary 1.4. If A and B are logically equivalent and we replace statement letters in A
and B by statement forms (all occurrences of the same statement letter being
replaced in both A and B by the same statement form), then the resulting
statement forms are also logically equivalent.
Proof. This is a direct consequence of Theorems 1.3 and 1.1. )
Example 1.22.
A + (B + C) and (A &B) + C are logically equivalent. Hence so are (Cv A) + (B + (A v B)) and
((Cv A) & B) + (A v B) (and, in general, so are A + (B + C) and (A&B) + C for any statement forms
A, B, C).
Theorem 1.5 (Replacement). If B and C are logically equivalent and if, within a statement
form A, we replace one or more occurrences of B by C, then the resulting
statement form A% is logically equivalent to A.
Proof. In the calculation of the truth values of A and A%, the distinction between B
and C is unimportant, since B and C always take the same truth value. )
Example 1.23.
Let A be (A v B) + C. Since A v B is logically equivalent to B v A, A is logically equivalent to
(Bv A) + C.
The following examples of logically equivalent pairs of statement forms will be extremely
useful in the rest of this book, for the purpose of finding, for a given statement form,
logically equivalent statement forms which are simpler or have a particularly revealing
structure. We leave verification of their logical equivalence as an exercise.
Example 1.24. 77AandA (Law of Double Negation)
Example 1.25. (a) A&A and A

(Idempotence)
(b) A v A and A
Example 1.26. (a) A & B and B&A

(Commutativity)
(b) A v B and B v A
Example 1.27. (a) (A&B) &C and A& (B&C)

(b) (A v B) v C and A v (B v C) (Associativity)
As a result of the associative laws, we can leave out parentheses in conjunctions or dis-
junctions, if we do not distinguish between logically equivalent statement forms. For
example, A v B v C v D stands for ((A v B) v C) v D, but the statement forms (A v (B v C)) v D,
Av((BvC)vD), (AvB)v(CvD) and Av(Bv(CVD)) are logically equivalent to it.

Terminology: In A1 v A2 v - - . v A,, the statement forms Ai are called disjuncts, while
in AI & AB & . . . & A,, the statement forms Ai are called conjuncts.
Example 1.28. De Morgan’s Laws.
(a) l(AvB) and lA& 1B
(b) l(A&B) and 1Av 1B
Example 1.29. Distributive Laws (or Factoring-out Laws).

(a) A&(BvC) and (A&B)v(A&C)
(b) Av (B&C) and (AvB) &(AvC)
Notice that there is a distributive law in arithmetic: a (b + c) = (a. b) + (a- c); but ??
the other distributive law, a + (b c) = (a + b) - (a + c) is false.

?? (Take a = b = c = 1.)
Example 1.36. Absorption Laws.
(I) (a) A v (A&B) and A

(b) A&(AvB) and A
(II) (a) (A&B) v 1B and A v 1B

(b) (AvB)& 1B and A& 1B
(III) If T is a tautology and F is a contradiction,

(a) (T&A) and A (c) (F&A) and F
(b) (TV A) and 1 (d) (Fv A) and A
We shall often have occasion to use the logical equivalence between (A & 1 B) v B and
A B, and between (A v 1 B) & B and A & B. We shall justify this by reference to Example
v
1.30(11), since it amounts to substituting 1 B for B in Example 1.30(11) and then using
Example 1.24.
Example 1.31. A+B and 1B+lA (Contrapositive)
Example 1.32. Elimination of conditionals.

(a) A+B and 1Av B
(b) A+B and l(A& 1B)
Example 1.33. Elimination of biconditionals.

(a) A-B and (A&B)v(lA&lB)
(b) A-B and (lAvB)&(lBvA)
Examples 1.32 and 1.33 enable us to transform any given statement form into a logically
equivalent statement form which contains neither + nor e.
1.8 DISJUNCTIVE NORMAL FORM

By literals we mean the statement letters A, B, C, . . . and the denials of statement
letters 1 A, lB, 1 C, . . . . By a fundamental conjunction we mean either (i) a literal or
(ii) a conjunction of two or more literals no two of which involve the same statement letter.
For instance, AZ, 1 B, A & B, 1 A1 & A & C are fundamental conjunctions, while 1 1 A,
A & B & A, B & A & C & 1 B are not fundamental conjunctions.
One fundamental conjunction A is said to be included in another B if all the literals of

A are also literals of Bt.For example, A & B is included in A & B, B & (1 C) is included
in (1 C) & B, B is included in A & B, and 1 C & A is included in A & B & 1 C, while B is
not included in A & 1 B.
A statement form A is said to be in disjunctive normal form (dnf) if either (i) A is a

fundamental csiljunction, or (ii) A is a disjunction of two or more fundamental conjunctions,
of which none is included in another.
Example 1.34. The following statement forms are in dnf.
(4 B
(b) 1Cv C
(c) A v (lB&C)
(d) (A& 1B) v (-IA& lB&C)
(e) (B& IA) v (IA& lB&D) v A v (B&C& 1D).
Example 1.35. The following statement forms are not in dnf.

(a) C& 1c
(b) (CvD) &A
(c) (C&A& -IB) v (-IC&A) v (Cc!&-IB).
Replacing statement forms by logically equivalent ones, we can transform a statement

form into one in disjunctive normal form.
Example 1.36. (AvB)&(AvCv 1B)
A v (B&(Cv 1B)) (Distributive Laws, Example 1.29)

A v (B&C) (Absorption Law, Example 1.30(IIb))
Example 1.37. l(AvC)v (A-B)
l(A v C) v (1A v B) (Example 1.32(u))

(1A & 1C) v 1A v B (Example 1.28(u), De Morgan’s Laws)
1AvB (Example 1.30(Ia))
tMore precisely, if all literals of A which do not occur within another literal of A are also literals of B
which do not occur within another literal of B. Thus B &A is not included in C&A & 1 B, and 1 B &A is
not included in B &A.
CHAP.11 THE ALGEBRA OF LOGIC 13
Example 1.38. (A& 1B)o (BvA)
[(A& lB)& (BvA)] v [l(A&lB) & l(BvA)] Example 1.33(a)

Examples 1.27(a), Examples
Example 1.33(u)
1.3O(IIb) 1.28(b), 1.24
I I I
[A & 1B &A] v [(lAvB)& (lB& lA)]
Example 1.25 Example 1.30(IIb)

1 1
[A&lB] v [(lA& lB)& lA]
Example 1.25(u)
1
[A&lB] v [lA& TB]
This is in disjunctive normal form. However, it is logically equivalent to
(A v 1A) & 1B (Example 1.29(u))

1B (Example 1.30(IIIu))
This example shows that there are two logically equivalent statement forms, both of which are in
disjunctive normal form.
The fact illustrated in Examples 1.36-1.38 is codified in the following proposition.
Theorem 1.6. Every statement form which is not a contradiction is logically equivalent
to a statement form in disjunctive normal form.
Proof. By Examples 1.32 and 1.33 we may find a logically equivalent statement form
in the connectives 1, &, V, and then, by De Morgan’s Laws (Example 1.28) we can move the
negation signs inward so that negation signs apply only to statement letters. Thus we may
confine our attention to statement forms built up from literals by means of & and V. The
proof proceeds by induction on the number n of the connectives & and v in the given state-
ment form A. If n = 0, A is a literal, and every literal is already in dnf. Assume now
that A contains k of the connectives & and V, and that the theorem is true for all natural
numbers n < k.
Case 1: A is B v C. By inductive hypothesis, B and C are logically equivalent to state-
ment forms B# and C#, respectively, in dnf. Hence A is logically equivalent to B# v C#.
Now if any disjuncts D, of B# or of C# are included in any other disjuncts DZ of B# or of
C#, then we drop the disjuncts DP (by Example 1.30(Iu)). The resulting statement form is
in dnf and is logically equivalent to A.
Case 2: A is B & C. By inductive hypothesis, B and C are logically equivalent to state-
ment forms B# and C#, respectively, in dnf. Hence A is logically equivalent to Be & C#.
Let us assume that B# is (B1 v . . * v B,) and C# is (Cl v . . * v C,), where the Bi’s and C’s
are fundamental conjunctions, and r A 1, s 2 1. Then B# & C# is
(BI v - - - v B,) & (C, v . . - v C,)
which by a Distributive Law (Example 1.29(b)) is logically equivalent to

[(Bl v . - - v B,) & C,] v . . . v [(Bl v - -. v B,) & C,]
and, again by a Distributive Law (Example 1.29(u)), each (BI v . . . v B7) & Cj is logically
equivalent to (Bl& Cj) v * . . v (B, & Cj). Thus we obtain the disjunction of all Bi & Cj, where
1 g i A r, 1 L j 4 S. Each Bi & Cj is a conjunction of literals. We can omit repeated literals
in Bi & Cj (by Example 1.25(a)), and, if both a statement letter and its denial occur as con-
juncts in Bi & Cj, then the latter is a contradiction and can be dropped (by Example
1.30(IIId)). (Not all the Bi & Cj will be dropped, since, in that case, A would be logically
equivalent to a disjunction of contradictions and hence, would be a contradiction itself.) The
resulting disjunction is in dnf. )
Remark (1) on Theorem 1.6. A statement form in dnf cannot be a contradiction. For,
if 11& . . . & Lk is one of its disjunctions, where each Li is a literal, then we assign to the
statement letter appearing in Lithe value T if Li is the statement letter itself, and the value
F if Li is the denial of the statement letter. This assignment of truth values makes each Li
true and hence L1& . . . & Lk true, and therefore the whole disjunction must be true (since
one of its disjuncts is true). Thus the disjunction cannot be a contradiction.
Example 1.39.
In (A & 1B & C) v ( 1A & 1B & C), if we make A true, B false and C true, then the first disjunct
A & 1B & C is true (and, alternatively, if we make A false, B false and C true, then the second disjunct is true).
Remark (2) on Theorem 1.6. From the proof it is clear that the logically equivalent
statement form in dnf may be chosen so that its statement letters already occur in the given
statement form, i.e. no new statement letters are introduced.
There is a special type of dnf which will be very useful. A statement form A in dnf is
said to be in full disjunctive normal form (with respect to the statement letters S1, . . . , Sk) if
(i) any statement letter in A is one of the letters S1, . . . , Sk, and
(ii) each disjunct in A contains all the letters S1, . . . , Sk.
Example 1.40.
Thestatementforms(A&B&lC)v(lA&B&C)v(A&lB&lC) and lB&A&lCareinfulldis-
junctive normal form (with respect to A, B, C). However, (A &B) v (1A & B & C) and 1A v (A & 1 B & 1 C)
are not in full disjunctive normal form with respect to A, B, C.
Example 1.41.
The statement form 1B is in full dnf with respect to B, but not with respect to A and B. The state-
ment form (A & 1 B) v (A &B) is in full dnf with respect to A and B, but not with respect to any other
collection of letters.
Theorem 1.7. Every non-contradictory statement form A containing S1, . . . , Sk as its

statement letters is logically equivalent to a statement form in full dnf (with
respect to sl, . . . , Sk).
Proof. A is known by Theorem 1.6 to be logically equivalent to a statement form B in

dnf, and the statement letters of B already occur in A. Now assume that some statement
letter Si is missing from a disjunct Dj of B. However, Dj is logically equivalent to
Dj & (Si v 1 S) (by Example 1.30(IIIa)), which in turn is logically equivalent to (Dj& Si) v
(Dj & 1 Si) (by Example 1.29(a)). Hence we replace Dj by (Dj& Si) v (Dj & 1 Si). In this way
we can introduce the letters S, . . . , Sk into any of the disjuncts from which they are missing.
The final result is in full dnf with respect to S1, . . ., Sk. )
Example 1.42.
(A & 1B) v B v (1A & 1 B & 1C) is in dnf, but not in full dnf with respect to A, B, C. We obtain
a logically equivalent full dnf as follows:
(A&lB&C) v (A&-IB&IC) v B v (lA&lB&lC)
(A&lB&C) v (A&lB&lC) v (B&A) v (B&-IA) v (lA& -IB& 1C)
(A&-lB&C) v (A&lB&lC) v (B&A&C) v (B&A&lC) v (B&lA&C)
v (B&-IA& -iC) v (lA& lB& -IC)

In general, the method indicated in Theorem 1.7 can be summarized in the following
way. If letters Sj,, . . ., Sjr are missing from a disjunct Dj, we add as conjuncts to Di all of
the 2’ possible combinations of Sj,, . . . , Sjr or their denials. For example, to obtain a state-
ment form in full dnf (with respect to A, B, C) logically equivalent to 1 B, we construct
(-lB&A&C) v (lB&A&lC) v (lB&lA&C)v(-lB&lA&lC)
1.9 ADEQUATE SYSTEMS OF CONNECTIVES

As we have remarked earlier, every statement form determines a truth function, and
this truth function may be exhibited by means of a truth table. The converse problem
suggests itself: For any given truth function, is there a statement form determining it?
There are 2’*“’ truth functions of n variables. For, there are 2% truth assignments to
the n variables, and, to each of these assignments, the truth function can associate the value
T or the value F.
Example 1.43.
The four truth functions of one variable are
nisi Av~ i A&~
Fig. 1-22
Example 1.44.
The sixteen truth functions of two variables are
A B -IA 1B Av -IA A&lA AvB A&B
T T F F T F T T
F T T F T F T F
T F F T T F T F
F F T T T F F F
A+B 1 A-B 1 -I(A++B) 1 B+A 1 IA&-IB I 1AvlB 1 l(1 ? + A) -t(A+ B)
F F F
T T F
T F T
T F F
Fig. 1-23
Theorem 1.8. Every truth function is determined by a statement form in the connectives
1, &, v.
Proof. The given truth function f(xl, . . . , z,) can be exhibited as a “truth table”:
Xl x2 .. . X73 fh x2, . . *,x,)
T T ... T
F T ... T
T F ... T
F F ... T
... .
Fig. l-24
There are 2” rows in the table. In each row, the last column indicates the corresponding
value f(xl, . . . , xn). In constructing an appropriate statement form, we shall associate the
letters AI, . . . , A, with the variables x1, . . . , x,,.
Case 1: The last column contains only F’s. Then the statement form (AI & 1 A) v * . . v
(A, & 1 A,) determines f. (Of course, any contradiction also determines f.)
Case 2: There are some T’s in the last column. For 14 i A n and 14 k 6 2”, let
Ai if Ai takes the value T in the kth row

Aik =
{ 1 Ai if Ai takes the value F in the kth row
Let Dk stand for the fundamental conjunction Alk & A2k & . . . & Ank. In an obvious way,
Dk is associated with the kth row of the truth table. For, Dk is T under the truth assignment
given in the kth row (where Ai is assigned the value given to Xi), and Dk is F under the truth
assignment given in any other row. (Notice that, in any other row, say the jth, some Ai
will be assigned a value different from its value in the kth row, Hence under the truth
assignment corresponding to the jth row, Aik will receive the value F and hence Dr will also
receive the value F.) Now let kl, . . . , k, be the rows in which the truth function f has the
value T. Let A be the statement form DQ v - - . v Dk,. Then A determines the truth func-
tion f. (For the k,th row, f takes the value T; but Dkl also is T, and therefore so is A. For
the jth row, where j is different from any of kl, . . . , k,, the function f takes the value F; but
each Dkl also is F on the jth row, and hence so is A.) Notice that A is a statement form in
the connectives 1, &, V. )
Remark on Theorem 1.8. If the given truth function is not always F (Case 2), the
statement form A constructed in the proof is in full disjunctive normal form. This gives
us a way of constructing a full dnf logically equivalent to a given non-contradictory state-
ment form C. Just write down the truth table for C and then construct the corresponding
statement form A as in the proof of Theorem 1.8.
Example 1.45.
Given the truth function
21 22 fh 22)
T T F
F T T
T F T
-t-l-
F F T
Fig. l-25
D, is lA,&A,, D, is Al& lA2, D, is lA,& lA2. Hence
(lA,&A,) v (A,& -IA& v (lA,& lA,)
determines the given truth function.

A B AIB
I-T-
T T F
F T T
T F T
F F T
Fig. 1-28
A / B means “not both A and B”. The connective ( is called the Sheffer stroke. { I} is
adequate, since 1 A is logically equivalent to A) A, and A v B is logically equivalent to
(A I4 I P I W.
Let 1 be the connective corresponding to the truth-functional operation of joint denial,
given by the truth table
A B A&B
T T F
F T F
T F F
t F F T
Fig. 1-29
A J B is read “neither A nor B”. {J} is adequate, since 1 A is logically equivalent to

A J A, and A & B is logically equivalent to (A J A) J (B & B).
Theorem 1.10. The only one-element adequate systems of binary connectives are {(} and
(11.
Proof. Let g(x, y) be the truth function of a binary connective # forming an adequate
system. Clearly, g(T, T) = F. For, if g(T, T) were T, then any statement form in # alone
would always take the value T when its statement letters all took the value T, and no such
statement form could determine the negation operation. For the same reason (reversing
the roles of T and F), g(F, F) = T. The situation at this stage is given by Fig. l-30.
A 1 B 1 A#. I3
T T F
F T ?
T F ?
F F T
Fig. l-30
Case 1. The second row is F and the third row is T. Then A # B is logically equivalent
to 7 8, and all the statement forms in # alone using the letters A and B would be logically
equivalent to one of A, B, 1 A, 1 B. Then { #} would not be adequate.
Case 2. The second row is T and the third row is F. This is handIed in exactly the
same way as Case 1, since A # B would be logically equivalent to 1 A.
Case 3. The second and third rows are F. Then # is J.
Case .4. The second and third rows are T. Then # is j. )

Solved Problems
1.1. Reduce the following sentences to statement forms.
(a) A necessary condition for x to be prime is that x is odd or x = 2.
(b) A sufficient condition for f to be continuous is that f is differentiable.
(c) A necessary and sufficient condition for Jones to be elected is that Jones wins
75 votes.
(d) Grass will grow only if enough moisture is available.
(e) It is raining but the sun is still shining.
(f) He will die today unless medical aid is obtained.
(9) If taxes are increased or government spending decreases, then inflation will not
occur this year.
Solution:
(a) P + (0 v D), where P is “x is prime”, 0 is “x is odd”, and D is “x = 2”.
(b) D + C, where D is “f is differentiable” and C is “f is continuous”.
(c) Et) V, where E is “Jones will be elected” and V is “Jones will win 75 votes”.
(d) G + M, where G is “grass will grow”, and M is “enough moisture is available”.
(e) R &S, where R is “it is raining”, and S is “the sun is still shining”.
(Note that “but” indicates conjunction, usually with an element of surprise.)
(f) 1 D + M (or, equivalently, 1M + D), where D is “he will die today”, and M is “medical
aid is obtained”.
(g) T v G + lZ, where 2’ is “taxes are increased”, G is “government spending decreases”, and
Z is “inflation will occur this year”.
1.2. Eliminate as many parentheses as possible from:

(4 {[(Av B) + (1 C)l v KUB) &C)WI)
(b) {[A&(l(lB))l * P4CvB)l~
(4 [P - (CvB)) e (A&(l(l WI
Solution:
(a) [(AvB)+ -ICI v [lB&C&B]
(b) [A& llB] t, [Bt,(CvB)]
(c) B t) (CvB) - (A& 1-iB)
1.3. Write the truth tables for (a) (A v 1 B) + (C&A), (b) (A cs 1 B) v (B + A).
Solution:
(4
A B C Av 1B C&A (Av -IB)+(C&A)
- -
T T T T T
F T T F T
T F T T T
F F T F F
T T F F F
F T F F T
T F F F F
F F F F F
(b)
A B 1B AolB (A - 1B) v (B+A)
T T F F T
F T F T T
T F T T T
F
-i-t-t- F T F T
1.4. Write abbreviated truth tables for

(a) ((A+B)+B) v lA, (b) (lA& lB)-+ (BeC).
Solution :
(a) ((A + B) + B) v -I A (b) (-IA & -IB)+(B-C)
TTTTT TFT FTFFT TTTT

FTTTT TTF TFFFT TTTT
TFFTF TFT FTFTF TFFT
FTFFF TTF TFTTF FFFT
FTFFT TTFF
TFFFT TTFF
FTFTF TFTF
TFTTF TFTF
1.5. Show that the following are tautologies.

(a) (At,(A&lA))++lA,
(b) ((A + B) + C) + ((C + A) + P 3 A)),

(c) (A + B) + ((B -, C) -+ (A -, C)).
Solution:
(4
A -IA A&-IA A t) (A & -!A) (At,(A&lA))- -IA
T F F F T
F T F T T
(b) Instead of using a truth table, we show that the statement form cannot be F. Assume that
some assignment makes it F. Then ((A + B) + C) is T while ((C + A) + (D + A)) is F. Since
the latter is F, C + A is T but D --*A is F. Since the latter is F, D is T and A is F. Since
C + A is T and A is F, C must also be F. Since ((A -+ B) + C) is T and C is F, it follows that
A + B is F. But this is impossible, since A is F.
(c) As in (b), we shall show that the statement form is a tautology by proving that the assumption
that it is ever F leads to a contradiction. Assume that some assignment makes it F. Then
A + B is T, while (B + C) -+ (A + C) is F. Since the latter is F, B + C is T and A + C is F.
Since the latter is F, A is T and C is F. Since B + C is T and C is F, it follows that B is F.
Since A + B is T and B is F, we know that A is F, contradicting the fact that A is T.
1.6. Show that the following are contradictions.

(a) (AvB)&(AvlB)&(lAvB)&(lAvlB),
(b) [(A&C) v (B&lC)l t) [(lA&C)v (lB&lC)].

Solution:
(a) Any truth assignment to A and B makes one of the conjuncts false.
(b) Let A stand for the statement form.
1.10. For each of the following, find a logically equivalent statement form in full disjunctive
normal form (with respect to all the variables occurring in the statement form):
(a) (A&lB) v (A&C) (c) B + (A v 1 C)
(b) (A v B) ti 1 C (d) (A + B) + ((B + C) + (A + C))
Solution :
(a) (A&lB)v(A&C)
(A&lB&C)v(A&lB&lC)v(A&B&C)
(b) (AvB)- -IC

((AvB)&~C)v(l(AvB)&C)
((A& lC)v(B&lC))v(lA&lB&C)
(A&B&lC)v(A&7B&lC)v(A&B&lC)v(lA&B&lC)v(~A&lB&C)
(A&B&lC)v(A&lB&lC)v(lA&B&lC)v(lA&lB&C)
(c) B+(Av -IC)
-iBv(AvlC)
1BvAvlC
(d) l(A+B)v ((B-+C)+(A+C))
~-I(A&~B)v(~(B-+C)V(A+C))
(A&lB)v(ll(B&lC)vlAvC)
(A&-IB)v(B&~C)V~AVC
(A&~B&C)v(A&lB&lC)v(A&B&lC)v(lA&B&lC)
~(-IA&B&C)~(~A&~B&C)~(-IA&~B&~C)~(A&B&C)
1.11. Two statement forms A and B in full dnf (with respect to the same statement letters)
are logically equivalent if and only if they are essentially the same (i.e. they contain
the same fundamental conjunctions except possibly for a change in the order of the
conjuncts in each conjunction).
Solution:
Assume that A has as one of its disjuncts a fundamental conjunction B, & . . . & B, (where each
B, is a literal), no permutation of the conjuncts of which is a disjunct of B. Under the truth assign-
ment which assigns T to a statement letter if it is one of the literals Bi and assigns F to a statement
letter if its denial is one of the literals Bi, B, & . . . & B, is T, and hence A is also. But every other
essentially different fundamental conjunction is F, and therefore B must be F. Thus A and B
could not be logically equivalent.
1.12. By a fundamental disjunction we mean either (i) a literal or (ii) a disjunction of two
or more literals no two of which involve the same statement letter. One fundamental
disjunction A is said to be included in another B if all the literals of A are also literals
of B. A statement form A is in conjunctive normal form (cnf) if either (i) A is a
fundamental disjunction or (ii) A is a conjunction of two or more fundamental dis-
junctions of which none is included in another. A statement form A in cnf is said
to be in full cnf (with respect to the statement letters SI, . . . , Sk) if and only if every
conjunct of A contains all the letters SI, . . . , Sk.
(a) Which of the following are in cnf? Which are in full cnf?
(i) (AvBv 1C) & (Av 1B) (iii) (AvB) & (Bv 1B)
(ii) (AvBvlC)&(AvB) (iv) 1 A
(b) The denial of a statement form A in (full) dnf is logically equivalent to a statement
form B in (full) cnf obtained by exchanging & and v and by changing each literal
to its opposite (i.e. omitting the negation sign if it is present or adding it if it is
absent). (Example: 1 ((A & 1 B & C) v (1 A & 1 B & C)) is logically equivalent to
(1AvBv 1C) & (AvBv lC).)
(c) Any non-tautologous statement form A is logically equivalent to a statement form
in full cnf (with respect to all statement letters in A).
(d) For each of the following, find a logically equivalent statement form in cnf (and
one in full cnf).
(i) (A+~B)&(Av(B&C)),
(ii) (A&B)v (‘AA&B),
(iii) A c) (B v 1 C).
(e) Given a truth table for a truth function (not always taking the value T), construct
a statement form in full cnf determining the given truth function.
Solution:
(a) (i) In cnf, but not in full cnf. (ii) Not in cnf, since one conjunct is included in the other.
(iii) Not in cnf, since B v 1B is not a fundamental disjunction. (iv) In full cnf.
(b) This follows by several applications of De Morgan’s Laws (Example 1.28(a)).
(c) Assume A is non-tautologous. Then 1 A is not a contradiction, and, by Theorem 1.7, 1A is
logically equivalent to a statement form in full dnf (with respect to all the statement letters
in A). Hence by part (b), 11 A is logically equivalent to a statement form in full cnf.
But A is logically equivalent to 11 A.
(d) (i) (A+ IB)&(Av(B&C))
(1Av -IB)&((AvB)&(AvC))
(lAvlB)&(AvB)&(AvC) (cnf)
(~A~-IB~C)&(~A~-~B~~C)&(A~B~C)&(A~B~~C)&(A~~B~C)
(full cnf)
(ii) (A&B)v (lA& 1B)
(AvlA)&(AvlB)&(BvlA)&(BvlB)
(Av lB)&(Bv -IA) (full cnf)
(iii) A @ (B v 1C)
(A+(Bv lC))&((Bv lC)+A)
(~AvBv~C)&(l(BvlC)vA)
(1AvBv lC)&((lB&C)vA)
(lAvBv~C)&(~BvA)&(CvA)
(1AvBv lC)&(Av lB)&(AvC) (cnf)
(lAvBv~C)&(AvlBvC)&(AvlBvlC)&(AvBvC) (full cnf)
(e) Use the same procedure as in the proof of Theorem 1.8, except that we use only the rows ending
in F (rather than T), we exchange & and v throughout, and we replace each literal by its
opposite.
Example. B C
Answer:
1.13. Find a statement form in 1, &, v determining the truth function f(A, B, C):
f(A,B, C)
T
F
F
F
F
F
T
F
Solution: (A&B&C) v (A&lB&lC)
1.14. Find a statement form in the Sheffer stroke 1alone and one in 4 alone logically equiv-
alent to the statement form A & 1 B.
Solution:
For the Sheffer stroke, A& 1B
l(lAv B)
l(t-4 IA)vB)
l{[@I4l(Al41 I(B/B)l
([(A I A) I (A I A)] I (B I B)) I ([(A I A) I (A I A)1 I (B I B))
For &, A & 7B, A & (B&B), (A&A) & ((BJB)J(BJB))
1.15. Show that {+, V} is not an adequate system of connectives.

Solution :
If A is a statement form in -+ , v, then A takes the value T when the statement letters are T
(since T + T = T and T v T = T). Hence negation is not determined by any statement form in
‘,V.
1.16. Prove that { 1, ++} is not an adequate system of connectives.

Solution:
The eight truth functions in the following diagram are the only ones determined by statement
forms in 1, t). For, if we apply 1 to any of them or if we apply t) to any two of them we
obtain another of them.
A I B IlAll~ 1~4 +A A--IA A-B A- 1B
;j
Alternative solution. We shall show that the truth function determined by a statement form
in 1, f) takes T an even number of times. This is clearly true for statement letters, and, when it
holds for A, it must hold for 1A. It remains to show that, if it holds for A and B, it also holds for
AC* B. Let n be the number of rows in the truth table. n is even (since n is of the form 2k, where
k s 1). Let j and I be the number of T’s of A and B respectively. Let m be the number of T’s of
A&B,andletsbethenumberofT’sof lA&lB. Then j-?-I-m=n-s; hence jfl-n=m-s.
Since j, 1,n are even, it follows that m - s is even, i.e. m and s have the same parity (both odd or
both even). Hence m + s is even. But m + s is the number of T’s of A e B.
1.17. Determine whether the following arguments are correct by representing the sen-
tences as statement forms and checking to see whether the conjunction of the aasump-
tions logically implies the conclusion.
(a) Either Arlen is lying or Brewster was in Mexico in April or Crawford was not a
blackmailer. If Brewster was not in Mexico in April, then either Arlen is telling
the truth or Crawford was a blackmailer. Hence Brewster must have been in
Mexico in April.
(b) If the budget is not cut, then a necessary and sufficient condition for prices to
remain stable is that taxes will be raised. Taxes will be raised only if the budget
is not cut. If prices remain stable, then taxes will not be raised. Hence taxes
will not be raised.
Solution :
(a) Assumptions: AvBv lC, lB+ (1AvC).
Conclusion: B.
Does (A v B v 1 C) & (1 B -+ (7 A v C)) logically imply B? In other words, is [(A v B v 1 C) &

( 1B + (1A v C))] + B a tautology? Let us try to find a truth assignment making this statement
form false. Then the antecedent (A v B v 1 C) & (1 B + (1 A v C)) must be T and the consequent
BmustbeF. HenceAvBvlCisTand lB+(lAvC)isT. SinceBisF, 1BisT;and
therefore since 1 B + (1 A v C) is T, it follows that 1 A v C is T. Since A v B v 1 C is T but
B is F, it follows that A v 1 C is T. It is clear now that, if we take A to be T, C to be T, and
B to be F, then the statement form is F. Therefore the conclusion is not implied by the premises.
(b) Aasumptions: lB-+(P++R), R-+ qB, P-, 1R.
Conclusion: 7 R.
Does (lB+(PoR))&(R+lB)C(P + IR) logically imply lR? Let us try to find a
truth assignment making the former true and the latter false. Then 1 B + (P-R) is T,
R + 1 B is T, and P + 7 R is T. Since 7 R is F, R is T. But R + IB is T, and therefore
1B is T. Hence by the truth of 1 B + (P f) R), (P c* R) is T. Since R is T, P must be T.
Then since P + 1R is T, 1 R is T, which is impossible. Therefore the argument is correct.
(a) and (a) can be solved by writing down the truth tables, but the method used above is usually
faster.
1.18. Are the following assumptions consistent ? f will be continuous (D) if g is bounded
(C) or h is linear (E). g is bounded and h is integrable (B) if and only if h is bounded
(A) or f is not continuous. If g is bounded, then h is unbounded. If g is unbounded
or h is not integrable, then h is linear and f is not continuous.
Solution:
Assumptions: (CvE)+D, (C&B)o(AvlD), C+ lA, (lCvlB)+(E&lD). Assume

that these are all T.
Case 1. C is T. Then A is F. Since Cv E is T, D is T. Therefore A v 1 D is F. Hence

CBtBisF. HenceBisF,and 1CvlBisT. Thus E & 1 D is T, and D is F, which ia impossible.
Case 2. C is F. Thus 1 C is T, and therefore so is 1Cv 1 B. It follows that E & 1 D is T,

and therefore E is T and D is F. Since Cv E is T, then D is T, which is a contradiction. Hence
the assumptions are inconsistent.
This and similar problems can also be solved by writing out the complete truth table (which,
in this case, has sixteen rows).
1.19. If A is a statement form in 1, &, V, and A* results from A by interchanging & and v
and replacing all statement letters by their denials, show that A* is logically
equivalent to 1 A.
Solution:
Apply De Morgan’s Laws (Example 1.28) to 1A until no denials of conjunctions or disjunctions
remain. The result is A*.
1.20. Let A and B be statement forms in 1, &, v. By the dual Ad of A we mean the state-
ment form obtained from A by interchanging & and V. Notice that (Ad)d= A.
(a) Show that A is a tautology if and only if 1 (Ad) is a tautoIogy.
(b) Prove that, if A + B is a tautoIogy (i.e. A logically implies B), then Bd + Ad is a

tautology (i.e. Bd logically implies Ad). (Example: Since A & B + A is a tautology,
so is A + A v B.)
(c) Prove: A H B is a tautology (i.e. A is logically equivalent to B) if and only if

Ad H Bd is also a tautology (i.e. Ad is logically equivalent to Bd). (Example: Since
1 (A v B) is logically equivalent to 1 A & 1 B, it follows that 1 (A &B) is logically
equivalent to 1 A v 1 B.)
Solution:
(a) By Problem 1.19, l(Ad) is logically equivalent to (Ad)*, where (Ad)* is obtained from Ad by
exchanging & and v, and replacing all their statement letters by their denials. But then
(Ad)* is obtained from A by replacing all statement letters by their denials; and therefore if A
is a tautology, so is (Ad)* (by Theorem 1.1); and conversely if (Ad)* is a tautology, SO is A. (In
this case we substitute for each statement letter its denial and then again use Theorem 1.1
plus the Law of Double Negation (Example 1.24).)
(b) Assume A --* B is a tautology. Then 1 A v B is a tautology, and, by part (a), 1 (( 1 A v B)d) is a
tautology. But 1 (( 1 A v B)d) is 1 ( 1Ad & Bd), which is logically equivalent to Bd + Ad.
(c) Assume A ++ B is a tautology. Then A + B and B -+ A are tautologies. By part (b), Bd + Ad

and Ad + Bd are also tautologies. Hence Ad c) Bd is a tautology. Conversely, if Ad e Bd is a
tautology, then, by what we have just proved, (Ad)d t) (Bd)d is a tautology. But (Ad)d is A, and
(Bd)d is B.
Supplementary Problems
1.21. I Write the following sentences as statement forms.
(a) A depression will occur if government spending does not increase, and inflation will result only
if government spending increases.
(b) Jones will lose his job unless he makes good on the deficit, although Jones is the cousin of the
boss’s wife.
(c) Either f is discontinuous or if f is nonlinear, then f is differentiable.
1.22. Assume that the truth values of A, B, C are T, F, F. Compute the truth values of (a) (A + 1 B) ++
((Av C) & B), (b) (A t) (A -+ B)) v (A -) C).
1.23. If A -+ B is T, what can be deduced about the truth values of

(a) (AvC)-,(BvC), (b) (A&C)+(B&C), (c) (lA&B)-(AvB)?
1.24. In each of the following cases, what further truth values can be deduced from those already given?
(a) 1Av (A-‘B), (b) l(A&B)o(lAv lB), (c) (lAvB)+(A+ -lC).
F T F
1.26. Which of the following are statement forms? For the statement forms, determine the principal
connectives.
(4 (((A v (1 B)) + A) & (1 A)), (b) ((((A + B) + A) + A) v B), (4 (1 (((A v J3 v C) f) (1B)))
1.26. Eliminate as many parentheses as possible from

(4 ({[(Av(lB))vC] 81 [Av(l(lB))]l & (1AN
(b) ((l(AvB)) v (Cv (1B)))
(4 ((-4 + (l(Bv 0)) + ((14 + (1B)))
1.27. Write truth tables and abbreviated truth tables for the statement forms of Exercise 1.26.
1.28. Determine which of the following are tautologies, which are contradictions, and which are neither.
(a) [(A+B)-, l(B+A)] t) (A@B)
(b) ((A + B) + B) + B
(c) [(A-‘B)-+(C-+D)] -+ [E+{(D+A)-+(C-+A)}]
(4 A - (B*(Ae(B*A)N
(e) B&z l(AvB)
(f) (AvBvO - [(((A-‘B)+B)+C)+Cl
(d ((A + B) -, A) * (B + (B + A))
(h) (A-, (B& 1B)) + IA
1.29. Show that A is logically equivalent to B if and only if A logically implies B and B logically implies A.
1.30. Show that a statement form logically equivalent to a tautology is a tautology, and a statement form
logically equivalent to a contradiction is a contradiction.
1.31. Give an example to show that, if A logically implies B, then B does not necessarily logically imply A.
1.32. Of the following pairs D and E, find those pairs for which D is logically equivalent to E, those for
which D logically implies B, and those for which E logically implies D.
D E
(4 C c) ((A&C)v (B&z 1C)) B--i (C+A)
(b) Av (B-C) (AvB) W (AvC)
(4 l(BvC) 1B
(4 A v (B&C) AvB
(4 A*0 BeA
(f) A c, (B-C) (A c, B) c) C
1.33. Prove: A, v A, v --a v A, is T if and only if at least one of the Ai’s is T; and A, & A, & . . . & A,
is T if and only if all of the Ai’s are T.
1.34. Prove generalizations of DeMorgan’s Laws and the Distributive Laws, in the sense that the
following pairs are logically equivalent:
(a) -I (A, v * - * v A,) lA, & . . . & lA,
(b) l(A,& . . . &A,) lA, v -++ v lA,
(c) A & (B, v + 1. v 8,) (A & 4) ” **a v (A&B,)
(d) A v (B, & . . . & B,) (AvB,)& . . . &(AvB,)
1.35. Which of the following are fundamental conjunctions?

(a) A&B& -IA, (b) B&IA, (c) B&C&A&C.
1.36. Which of the following are in disjunctive normal form?

(a) (A&B) v (lA&B) v (A& TC)
(b) (B&z 1A) v (A&B) v (IA&B)
(c) TA & -IB
(d) (A&B) v (lA&B) v (A&B&C)
(e) (A&B) v (A& IB) v (lA&B) v (-IA& 1B)
1.37. Find a statement form in disjunctive normal form IogicalIy equivalent to:
(a) (A-+lB)&(BvC), (b) (AvlB)-C, (e) (AvBvlC)&(BvC).
1.38. Which of the following are in full dnf (with respect to all the variables occurring in the statement
form)? For those not in full dnf, find a logically equivalent statement form in full dnf.
(a) (A&B) v (lA& 1B)
(b) (A&B) v (lA&C)
(c) (A&B&C) v (A&B& -IC) v (A& lB&C)
(d) (A&B) v C
1.39. Which of the following are in conjunctive normal form? In full cnf? For any not in full cnf
(with respect to all its statement letters), find a logically equivalent statement form in full cnf.
(a) AvlB
(b) (AvB)&(AvlB)&(AvBvC)
(c) A&lB
(d) (AvB)&(Av 1B)
(e) (A&B) v (lA& 1B)
1.40. Which statement forms are in both dnf and cnf?
1.41. For each of the following truth tables (a,) (b), (c), construct a corresponding statement in full
dnf and one in full cnf.
A B C (4 (b) (4
l-l
T T T F F T
F T T F T F
T F T F T F
F F T T T F
T T F T F F
F T F F F T
T F F F F T
F F F T F F
1.42. A statement form A is a tautology if and only if it is logically equivalent to a statement form in
full dnf having 2” disjuncts, where n is the number of statement letters in A.
1.43. Find a statement form in 1, &, v logically equivalent to the statement forms
(a) (A f) (BvC))+ lA, (b) ((A + B) -j B) + A.
1.44. Find a statement form in the Sheffer stroke ) and a statement form in 4 logically equivalent to the
statement forms (a) (A v 1 B) & (A + C), (b) l(A & 1 B).
1.45. Show that A + B is logically equivalent to 1 (A c) B). (Cf. Example 1.2 on page 4.)
1.46. Find a statement form logically equivalent to the denial of (A v (B Jz C)) v (1 A & (B v C)).
1.47. Show that {e, +, &, v} is not an adequate system of connectives.
1.48. Show that { 1, +} is not an adequate system of connectives.
1.49. For which binary connectives 0 does { 1, 0) form an adequate system of connectives?
1.50. Determine whether the following arguments are correct.

(a) If April is rainy, then flowers will bloom in May and mosquitoes will thrive in June. If mos-
quitoes thrive in June, then malaria will increase in July. If flowers bloom in May, there will
be a lot of honey in September. If April is not rainy, then the lawns will be brown this summer.
Hence either there will be a lot of honey in September and malaria will increase in July, or the
lawns will be brown this summer.
(b) If f is continuous, then g or h is differentiable. If g is not differentiable, then f is not continuous
and f is bounded. A sufficient condition for g or h to be differentiable is that f be bounded.
Hence g is differentiable.
(c) If an orange precipitate forms, then either sodium or potassium is present. If sodium is not
present, then iron is present. If iron is present and an orange precipitate forms, then potassium
is not present. Hence sodium is present.
1.51. Check the consistency of the following sets of assumptions.

(a) If the roof needs repair or the house has to be painted, then either the house will be sold or no
vacation will be taken this summer. The house will be sold if and only if the roof needs repair
and a vacation will be taken this summer. If the house has to be painted, then the house will
not be sold or the roof does not need repair. Either a vacation will be taken this summer, or
the house has to be painted and the house will be sold.
(b) Either devaluation will occur, or, if exports do not decrease, then price controls will be imposed.
If devaluation does not occur, then exports will decrease. If price controls are imposed, then
exports will not decrease.
1.52.o A computer (called Farfel) has been built to answer any yes-or-no question, but it has been pro-
grammed either to answer all questions truthfully or to give incorrect answers to all questions.
If we wish to find out whether Fermat’s Last Theorem is true, what question should we put to the
computer? (Hint: Let A stand for “Fermat’s Last Theorem is true” and let B stand for “Farfel
answers all questions truthfully”. Construct a statement form A such that, if “A?” is put as a
question to Farfel, then the answer will be “Yes” if and only if A is true.)
1.53.JJ Find the duals of statement forms in 1, &, v which are logically equivalent to A + B and A * B,
and extend Problems 1.19-1.20 to statement forms in 1, &, V, +, @.
1.54.n Prove that a statement form A whose only connective is Cs is a tautology if and only if every state-
ment letter occurs in A an even number of times. (Hint: Problem 1.32(e, f).)
Chapter 2
The Algebra of Sets
2.1 SETS
By a set we mean any collection of objects.? For example, we may speak of the set of
all living Americans, the set of all letters of the English alphabet, or the set of all real
numbers less than 4. In most cases, sets will be defined by means of a characteristic
property of the objects belonging to the set. In the examples above, we used the properties
of being a living American, a letter of the English alphabet, or a real number less than 4.
Notation: For a given property P(x), let {x : P(z)} denote the set of all objects x such
that P(x) is true.
Example 2.1.
The set of all real roots of the equation x4 - 2x2 - 3 = 0 is denoted by
{z: xisarealnumber & d-2x2-3=0}
Sometimes we shall define a set merely by listing its elements within braces:
ia, b, c, . . . , h}. In particular, (b) is the set having b as its only member. Such a set {b)
is called a singleton. The set {b, c} contains b and e as its only members, and, if b Z c,
then {b, c} is called an unordered pair. Notice that {b, c} = {c, b}.
Example 2.2.
The set of integers strictly between 1 and 5 is equal to (2, 3,4}.
Example 2.3.
The set of all real roots of the equation x4 - 2x2 - 3 = 0 is equal to the set {&, -fl>.
We shall extend this method of denoting sets by listing a few elements of the set, fol-
lowed by dots, in such a way as to indicate the characteristic property of the elements of
the set.
Example 2.4.
{1,2,3, 4, * * .> is intended to represent the set of positive integers. (1, 4, 9, 16, 25, . . ., n2, . . .> is the
set of squares of positive integers. {Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, . . .} is the set of Presidents
of the United States.
Definition : An object x belonging to a set A is said to be a member or element of A. We

shall write x E A to indicate that x is a member of A. The denial of z E A
will be written x B A.
Example 2.5. 6 E {z : z is an even integer}, 1 B {z: 5 is an even integer)
tS$nonyms for set are totality, family, and class.
30
CHAP. 21 THE ALGEBRA OF SETS 31
2.2 EQUALITY AND INCLUSION OF SETS. SUBSETS

The sets A and B are equal when and only when A and B have the same members.
Equality of A and B is designated in the usual way by A = B, and denial of this equality
by A # B.
Example 2.6. {z : x2 = 1 and cc is a real number} = {z : cz = 1 or 5 = -l}
We say that A is a subset of B if and only if every member of A is also a member of B.

We write A c B as an abbreviation for: A is a subset of B. Sometimes, instead of saying
that A is a subset of B, one says that A is included in B. The denial of A c B is written
A $B.
Example 2.7. (1, 3) c P, 2, 3, 61; lb, aI c 16 a, bk 012, 4) g (1, 2, 5)
Obvious properties of the inclusion relation are

Incl (i) A c A (Reflexivity).
Incl (ii) If A c B and B c C, then A c C (Transitivity).
Incl (iii) A = B if and only if (A c B & B c A).
It is convenient to introduce a special sign for the relation of proper inclusion. We shall
use A C B as an abbreviation for A c B & A #B. Thus A c B if and only if every member
of A is a member of B but there is a member of B which is not a member of A. If A c B,
we say that A is a proper subset of B. Hence the only subset of B which is not a proper
subset of B is B itself. The denial of A c B is written A C/ B.
Some basic properties of proper inclusion are:
PI(i) A @A.
PI(ii) If A c B & B c C, then A c C.
PI(iii) If A c B & B c C, then A c C.
PI(iv) If A C B, then B $ A.
Example 2.8. 11, 31 c 0, 2, 3); {1,3) $ 0, 31; u, 41 q 0, 31
2.3 NULL SET. NUMBER OF SUBSETS

Whenever P(z) is a property satisfied by no objects at all, then {x : P(X)} is a set having
no members. For example, {x : 2 f z} is a set with no members. We shall use p to denote
a set with no members. The set @ is called the null set or empty set. There is precisely
one null set, since any two null sets would contain the same members (namely, none at all)
and therefore must be equal. The null set is included in every set: $Bc A for all A.
Example 2.9.
The only subset of @ is @ itself.
Example 2.10.
The subsets of {z} are Q? and (2). Thus a singleton has two subsets.
Example 2.11.
If x # y, the subsets of the unordered pair {z, y} are a, {z}, {v} and (2, y}. Thus a two-element set
has four subsets.
32 THE ALGEBRA OF SETS [CHAP. 2
Example 2.12.
If 2, y and .z are three distinct objects, then the subsets of (5, y, x} are e), (~1, {y}, {z}, {s, y}, (2, z},
{y, z} and {cc, y, z}. Thus there are eight subsets of a three-element set.
Let T(A) denote the set of all subsets of A. Then T(A) = {B : B C A}. Examples
2.9-2.12 suggest the following result.
Theorem 2.1. For any non-negative integer n, if a set A has n elements, then the set
T(A) of all subsets of A has 2” elements.
First proof: The result is clear when n = 0 (Example 2.9). Assume a set A has n
elements, where n > 0. In choosing an arbitrary subset C of A, there are two possibilities
for each element x of A: 2 E C or x B C. Whether one element x is in the subset C is
independent of whether any other element 2/ is in C. Hence there are 2” ways of choosing
a subset of A.
Second proof: By induction on n. The case for n = 0 is clear (Example 2.9). Assume
that the result is true for n = k, and assume that A is a set with k + 1 elements, i.e.
A = {al, . . ., akt ak+l}. We must prove that A has 2k+1 subsets. Let B = (al, . . ., ak}.
Since B has k elements, then by inductive hypothesis B has 2k subsets. Every subset C of
B can be thought of aa determining two distinct subsets of A, i.e. C itself and C together
with the element ak+l. In addition, every subset D of A is determined in this way by pre-
cisely one subset C of B, i.e. C is obtained by removing ak+ 1 from D (where, if ak+ I e D,
then C is identical with D). Thus the number of subsets of A is twice the number of subsets
of B. But since B has 2k subsets, A has 2k+1 subsets. )
2.4 UNION
Given sets A and B, their union AU B consists of all elements of A or B or both. Thus
AUB = {x: XEAVZEB}. Remember that v stands for the inclusive “or”, i.e. for any
sentences A, B, AV B A
means or B or both.
Example 2.13. {1,2,3) U (1, 3,4, 61 = (1, 2, 3,4, 6)
{a> u @I = {a, b)
{0,2, 4, 6, 8, . ..> u {1,3,6,7,9, . ..> = {0,1,2,3,4,5, . ..I
If we represent the elements of A and B by points

within two circles, then their union consists of all A B
points lying within either of the two circles (see
Fig. 2-l). The union operation on sets has the
obvious properties:
AuA = A (Idempotence) a3
U(i)
U(ii) AUB = BU A (Commutativity) Fig. 2-1
U(iii) AU@ = A
U(iv) (AUB)UC = A U (SU C) (Associativity)
U(v) AUB = B ifandonlyif A GB

U(vi) AcAuB $ BCAUB
2.5 INTERSECTION
Given sets A and B, their intersection An B consists of all objects which are in both
A and B. Thus,
AnB = {x:x~A & LCEB)
Example 2.14. (1,2,41n {1,3,

41 = {1,4)
11,3,61n t&4,6> = $3
u, 3,51l-l
(0,21 = QJ
P-4I,21n lo,31= (01
Pictorially, we can visualize the intersection as

consisting of the shaded area of Fig. 2-2.
Two sets A and B such that An B = p are said
to be disjoint.
The following properties of the intersection opera-
tion are evident. Fig. 2-2
Int (i) A nA = A (Idempotence).

Int (ii) A rl B = Bn A (Commutativity).
Int (iii) A n $3 = @.
Int (iv) (A nB) n C = A fl (BnC) (Associativity).
Int (v) A n B = A if and only if A G B.
Int(vi) AnBcA & AnBcB.
The associative laws for unions and intersections allow us to omit parentheses in writing
unions or intersections of three or more sets. Thus we write An B rl C to stand for either
(A n B) n C or A n (B n C), since these sets are equal. Similarly A fl BnCnD has a unique
meaning, since any of the five ways of inserti.ng parentheses yields the same result.
Important relations between unions and intersections are given by the di8tributive laws:
Dist (i) A n (BUC) = (AnB) u (AnC).
Dist (ii) A u (Bn C) = (AUB) rl (AuC).
Property Dist (i) can be verified directly from the definitions by logical manipulations.
Thus,
An(BuC) = {x:: ZEA & xEBUC}
= {z: zEA & (XEBVZEC)}
= {x: (TEA & ZEB) v (TEA & ZEC)}

ZZ {x: xEAnB v zEAfiC)
= (AnB) u(AnC)
We also can check Dist (i) pictorially. In Fig. 2-3 below, we have vertical lines for
B U C and horizontal lines for A. Hence A n (B UC) is represented by the cross-hatched area.
In Fig. 2-4 below, the vertical lines indicate A rl B and the horizontal lines A n C. The com-
bined area represents (A n B) U (A n C) and is seen to be identical with the cross-hatched
area of Fig. 2-3. Dist (ii) may be handled in a similar manner (see Problem 2.3).
Fig. 2-3 Fig. 2-4
Diagrams as shown in Fig. 2-3 and 2-4 are called Venn diagrams. They are useful for
verifying identities involving operations on sets, but should not be considered tools of
rigorous mathematical proof. Similar pictorial methods can be given for four or more
sets (see [112]t and J. F. Randolph, American Mathematical Monthly, 1965, pp. 11’7-127),
but this does not seem fruitful enough to warrant consideration here.
Example 2.15. Show that A n (A uB) = A.
By U(vi), A cAuB. Hence, by Int (v), A n (AuB) = A.
Example 2.16. Show that A u (A n B) = A.
Au(AnB) = (AuA)n(AuB) = An(AuB) = A
The first equality is justified by Dist (ii), the second by U(i), and the third by Example 2.15.
The distributive laws have the obvious generalizations:

Dist (i’) A n (BluBzu . . . uB,) = (AnB1)u(AnB2)u -.- u(AnB,)
Dist (ii’) A u (BlnBzn . e - nB,) = (AuB1) n (AUBz) n . . e n (AUB,)

These can be proved directly, using mathematical induction.
2.6 DIFFERENCE AND SYMMETRIC DIFFERENCE

By the diflerence B-A of B and A we mean the set of all those objects in B which are
not in A (the shaded area of Fig. 2-5). Thus,
m
B-A = {x: xEB&xBA}
A 3
Clearly,
D(i) B-B = $3
D(ii) B-e, = B
Fig. 2-5
D(iii) e)-A = @
D(iv) (A-B)-C = A-(BUC)

= (A-C) - B
The symmetric difference A A B of sets A and B is

(A -B) U (B -A) (the shaded area of Fig. 2-6). Fig. 2-6
makes it clear that A A B = (A U B) - (A n B). Fig. 2-6
TThroughout this book numbers in brackets refer to Bibliography, pages 201-208.

The following properties are easily verified.

SD(i) AAA=~
SD(ii) AAB=BAA
SD(iii) A A $3 = A
Example 2.17.
Let A = {0,1,2,3,5}, B = {0,1,2,3}, C = {0,1,4,5}. Then BcA, C$A, AnC = {0,1,5},
B n C = (0, l), A -B = {5), A -C = {2,3}, B-C = {2,3}, C-B = {4,5}, A A B = (51, A AC = {2,3,4},
B A C = {2,3,4, 5).
2.7 UNIVERSAL SET. COMPLEMENT

We shall often find it useful to confine our attention to the subsets of some given set X.
In such a case, X is called the universal set or the universe (of discourse).
The union, intersection, difference, and symmetric difference of subsets of X are again
subsets of X. When we restrict ourselves to subsets of X, there is still another operation
which can be introduced. If A c X, then the complement A of A is defined to be
Thus, A = (z: x~X & x4A). Whenever we use compEements, it is assumed that we
X-A.
are dealing only with subsets of some fixed universe X.
The following assertions are easily verified.
C(ii) AuB = AnB

De Morgan’s Laws
C(iii) AnB=AuB
C(iv) AnA=p C(viii) A c B if and only if B L A

C(v) Au/i = X C(ix) A = B if and only if A = B
C(vi) $3 = X C(x) A-B= Ani?
C(vii) X = ST, C(xi) AAB = (An@u@nB)
From C(x) and C(xi) we see that difference and symmetric difference are dispensable in the
presence of union, intersection and complement.
Example 2.18.
Let us check C(ii) using definitions and logical transformations.
AuB = {s:sEX&z4AuB} = {z:zEX& -1(z6AvrEB)}
=I {x: zEX&(z4A&z4B)} = {x: (xEX&x4A)&(sEX&s4B)}
= {x: xEX&x4A}n{x:xEX&x4B} = /inB
We also may use Venn diagrams to verify the validity of C(ii). Compare Fig. 2-7 and 2-8.
A u B is the shaded area. A n B is the cross-hatched area.

Fig. 2-7 Fig. 2-8
De Morgan’s Laws C(ii)-C(iii) have the obvious generalizations:

C(ii’) AluAzu-.- WA, = &n&n..-nA,
C(iii’) A1 n A2 n -.. n A, = h,u&u ..a uA,
Example 2.19.
A c B if and only if A n B = $3. In’ Fig. 2-9, the cross-
hatched area is A n B. To say that this is $3 is equivalent to
saying that A is entirely within B.
Logical proof:
A = AnX = An(BuB) = (AnB)u(An@
Hence if A n B = @, then A = A n B; therefore, by Int (v),
A c B. On the other hand, if A C B, then by Int (v), A = A n B
and therefore
AnB = (AnB)nB = An(BnB)= An@ = 8 Fig. 2-9
2.8 DERIVATIONS OF RELATIONS AMONG SETS

We have seen two ways of verifying propositions about sets: by means of analogous
logical laws, or by pictorial methods (usually Venn diagrams). The first method is the
only rigorous one, but the use of diagrams is sometimes quicker and more intuitive.
Example 2.20.
Prove A-(BuC) = (A-B)n(A-C).
This is clear from Figs. 2-10 and 2-11.
Cross-hatched: (A - B) n (A - C) Unshaded: A - (B u C)
Fig. 2-10 Fig. 2-11
More rigorously,
A-(BuC) = {z: xEA & x@(BuC)}
= {x: xEA & (x4B&x4C)}

II {x: (zEA &x4B) & (xEA & z4C))
= {x: xEA & x4B) n {x: xEA & xBC}
= (A - B) n (A - C)
Example 2.21.
Prove: (AuB)nB = A ifandonlyif AnB=JD.
In Fig. 2-12 below, the cross-hatched part represents (A UB) n B and lies entirely within A. The rest
of A is the lens-shaped intersection A n B. Hence to say that (A u B) n fi is identical with A is equiva-
lent to saying that A n B = @.
Logical proof:
(AuB)nB = (Ank?)u(Bn& (by Dist (ii))
= (An@u@ (byWV))
ZI AnB (by U(iii))
Hence (AuB) n B = A if and only if A n l? = A. But

A n B = A if and only if A c B (Int (v)), which holds if and
only if A n B = @ (by Example 2.19 and C(i)). Fig. 2-12
Example 2.22.
Simplify A- u (BnC).
Ani?u(BnC) = piu&u(BnC) (by C(iii))
= (AuB)u(BnC) (byC(i))
= Au (Bu(BnC)) (by U(iv))
= /iuB (by Example 2.16)
In simplifying expressions, we make frequent use of De Morgan’s Laws C(ii) and C(iii)
for distributing complement bars over smaller expressions, C(i) for eliminating double
complements, Examples 2.15 and 2.16, and the distributive laws Dist (i) and Dist (ii).
Example 2.23.
Simplify (AuBuC) n (Am) n c.
(AuBUC)n(Am)nn = (AuBuC)n(AuBuC)n6 (De Morgan)
= [(AuBuC) n(iiuBuC)]n6 (Associativity of n)

= [(AnA)u (BUG)]n6 (Dist (ii))
= [BuC]nC = (BnC)U(Cne) = (BnC)up (C(iv), U(iii))
= BnC
2.9 PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC AND THE ALGEBRA OF SETS

Every truth-functional operation determines a corresponding operation on sets. For
example, denial determines complementation: A = {x : 1 (x E A)} ; conjunction determines
the intersection operation: A n B = {x : x E A & x E B}; and disjunction determines the
union operation: A U B = {x : x E A v x E B}. In general, if # is a connective corre-
sponding to a truth function f(xl,. . .,x,), then we define a corresponding operation @ on
setsby @(Al ,..., A,) = (x: #(xEA*, . . . . XEA,)}. Thus the set-theoretic operation of
symmetric difference corresponds to the exclusive usage of “or”.
Example 2.24.
The operation of alternative denial determines the set-theoretic operation A n B, while joint denial
determines the operation A n B.
In general, a uniform way of determining the set-theoretic operation corresponding to

a given truth function is to express the latter in terms of 1, &, V, and then replace 1, &, v
by -, n , U respectively. The statement letters need not be replaced since they can serve
as set variables in the new expression.
2.10 ORDERED PAIRS. FUNCTIONS

If x f y, then {x, y} was called the unordered pair of x and y. We say “unordered”
because {x, y} = {y, x}. Let us define an ordered pair (x, y), which is determined by x and
y, in, that order. By this we mean that the following proposition holds: if (x, y) = (u, v),
then x =u and y=v.
Theorem 2.2. (x, y) = {(x), (x, y}} is an adequate definition of an ordered pair.
Proof. Assume (x, y) = (u, v). We must prove that x = u and y = v. We have
ilx), {XtY)> = {{u>, {%V>) cw

Since {x} is a member of the left side of equation (ZJ), it must also be a member of the
right side. Hence
(x> = {u> or {x} = {u,v}
Therefore x = u or x = u = v. In either case, x = u. Now by (Z.l),
Ix, Y> = {u) or {x,21) = {u, VI

If {x, y} = {u, v}, then {x, y} = {x, v} since x = u. Hence y = x or y = V. If y = x,
then {y} = {y, v} and y = v. In all cases, y = v. If WY) + hv}, then PAY> = 04
and so x = y = u. By (2.1),
{u,v} = {x} or {%Vl = {%Y>
Since {u,v} z {x,y}, {u, v} = {x} and so u = v = x. Therefore y = o. )
Let us recall the definition of a function. A function f from A into B is a way of

associating an element of B to each element of A. The phrase “way of associating” may
be replaced by a more precise notion:
(1) f is a set of ordered pairs such that, if (x, y) E f and (x,x) E f, then y = z;
(3) for every x in A there exists some y in B such that (x, y) E f. (Such an object y
must be unique, by virtue of (1); it is denoted in the standard way by f(x).)
We say that f is a function from A onto B if f is a function from A into B and every
element of B is a value f(x) for some x in A.
Example 2.25.
The function f such that f(z) = x2 for every x in the set A of all integers is a function from A into
(but not onto) A. On the other hand, f is a function from A onto the set B of all squares.
A function f is said to be one-one if it assigns different values to different arguments,

i.e. f(x) = f(y) implies x = y.
Example 2.26.
The function f in Example 2.26 is not one-one, since f(--n) = ns = f(n) for all integers n. On the
other hand, the function g such that g(x) = x 2 for all non-negative integers z is a one-one function, since
U* = V* implies u = ?I for all non-negative integers u and w.
A one-one function from A onto B is called a one-one correspondence between A and B.

For example, the function h such that h(x) = x + 1 for all odd integers x is a one-one
correspondence between the set of all odd integers and the set of all even integers.
2.11 FINITE, INFINITE, DENUMERABLE, AND COUNTABLE SETS

A finite set is a set which is either empty or can be enumerated by the positive integers
from 1 up to some integer n. More precisely, A is finite if there is a positive integer n
such that there is a one-one correspondence between A and the set of all positive integers
less than n. (Wh en n = 1, A must be the empty set.)
For example, to justify the assertion that the set of fingers on a hand is finite we set
up the correspondence
It is clear that a subset of a finite set is finite (and hence that the intersection of any set
with a finite set is finite). Also obvious is the fact that the union of two finite sets is finite.
A set is said to be infinite if it is not finite. Examples are the set of positive integers,
the set of rational numbers, and the set of real numbers. Clearly any set containing an
infinite set must also be infinite, and therefore the union of an infinite set with any other
set is infinite. However, the intersection of two infinite sets need not be infinite. For
example, the set of even integers and the set of odd integers have an empty intersection.
A set A is said to be denumerable (or countably infinite) if and only if A can be enumer-
ated by the set P of all positive integers, i.e. if there is a one-one correspondence between
P and A.
Example 2.27.
(1) The set of positive even integers is denumerable. Here the one-one correspondence is given by
f(n) = 272. (2) The set of all integers is denumerable. Here the enumeration is given by 0, 1, -1, 2, -2, 3,
n/2 if n is even
-3,... . The one-one correspondence is s(n) =
-(n - 1)/Z if n is odd *
Clearly the union of a finite set and a denumerable set is also denumerable. (Just
enumerate the finite set first and continue with the enumeration of the denumerable set,
omitting repetitions.) The union of two denumerable sets is again denumerable. (For, if
A = {al, a2, . . . } and B = { bl, bz, . . . }, then A U B = {al, bl, ~2, b2, . . . }, where in the latter
enumeration we omit any repeated objects.) If we remove a finite number of elements from
a denumerable set, the remaining set is still denumerable.
A set is said to be countable if and only if it is either finite or denumerable. Obviously,

any subset B of a countable set A is also countable. (For, in an enumeration of A, we omit
all objects which are not in B. The resulting enumeration of B does or does not terminate.
If it does, B is finite. If it does not, B is denumerable.) The union of two countable sets is
a countable set. This follows from what has been said above about finite and denumerable
2.12 FIELDS OF SETS
By a field of sets on X we mean a non-empty collection y of subsets of X such that, for

any members A and B in 1;‘, the sets Au B, Arl B, and A are also in F. Another way of
expressing this is to say that 7 is closed under the operations of union, intersection and
complementation. Since AU B = A- and A fl B = A-, it suffices to verify closure
under complementation and either union or intersection.
Examples of fields of sets are:

(1) the set T(X) of all subsets of X;
(2) the set of all finite subsets of X and their complements;
(3) iam*
Notice that any field 7 of subsets of X must coniain both $3 and X. For, if B E 7, then
B E 7: and hence @= BITBET. Therefore X= @ET.
2.18 NUMBER OF ELEMENTS IN A FINITE SET

Let #(A) stand for the number of elements in a finite set A. Clearly
#(AluAz) = #(AI) + #(AZ) - #(AlnAz)
For three sets, we have
#(AlUAzuAs) = #(Al) + #(AZ) + #(As)

- #(ADAM)
- #(AlnAz) - #(AdAa)
+ #(AlnAznAQ)
and, for four sets,
#(AIUAZUA~UAJ) = #(AI) + #(AZ) + #(As) + #(Ad)

- #(AlnAz) -#(AlnA3)-#(AlnA4)- - #(AznA4)
#(AznA3) - #(A3nA4)
+#(AlnA2nA3)+ #(AlnABnA,) + #(AlnA3nA4)+ #(AznA3nA4)
- #(AlfIAznA3nAd)
The general formula for n sets should be clear from the examples for n = 2,3,4.
Example 2.28.
In a two-party election district consisting of 136 voters, 67 people voted for at least one Democrat and
84 people voted for at least one Republican. How many people voted for candidates of both parties?
#(RnD) = #(R)+ #(D)- #(RuD) = 84 + 67 - 135 = 16

Here R is.the set of people who voted for at least one Republican and D the set of people who voted for
at least one Democratic candidate. Hence R u D is the set of all voters and R f~ D is the set of all people
who split their ballots.
Example 2.29.
A government committee reported that, among the students using marijuana, LSD or heroin at a
certain university, 90% used marijuana, 6% used LSD and 7% heroin, while 4% took marijuana and LSD,
5% marijuana and heroin, 2% heroin and LSD, and 1% took all three. Are the committee’s figures
consistent?
Note that, if there are n students taking at least one of the drugs, and if H is a set of students,
then the percentage in H is #(H)/n.Hence if we let A, B, C be the sets of students taking marijuana, LSD
and heroin respectively, and we divide the equation for #(A UBUC) by n to obtain the percentages,
%(AuBuC) = %(A) +%(B)+%(C)- %(AnB) - %(AnC) -%(BnC)+%(AnBnC)

100 = 90+6+‘7-4-5-2+1 = 93
which is impossible. Hence the figures are not consistent.

CILtP.~2] THE ALGEBRA OF SETS 41
Solved Problems
2.1. Show that the cancellation law
if AUB=AUC then B=C
is false by giving a counterexample.
Solution:
A = C = {a}. B = $3.
2.2. Show that parentheses are necessary for writing expressions involving more than
one of the operations rl and U.
Solution:
Consider A n B u C. This is either A n (BU C) or (An B) U C. But these two sets are not
necessarily equal. Take A = @ and B = C # @. Then An(BuC) = @, but (AnB)uC =
@UC = c.
2.8. Prove the distributive law Dist (ii), page 33: A U (Bn C) = (AU B) fl (A UC).
Solution:
Logical Proof.
Au(BnC) = {z: SEA v zE(BnC)}
= (5: zEA v (xEB & xEC)} = {z: (zEA v s:EB) & (icEA v zEC)}
= {x : zEA v zEB} n{z: SEA v zEC} = (AuB)n(AuCj

PiotoriaZ Proof. In Fig. 2-13, the vertical lines indicate B n C and the shaded area is A. In Fig.
2-14, the vertical lines indicate A u B, the horizontal lines A U C, and the cross-hatched area
(A uB) n (A u c) is identical with the marked area of Fig. 2-13.
Fig. 2-13 Fig. 2-14
2.4. Prove the generalized distributive law Dist (ii’), page 34:
Au(Blnss -nB,) = (AuB1)n~~~n(AuB,)
Solution:
For n = 1, the assertion is obvious and the case n = 2 is the distributive law Dist (ii).
Now using mathematical induction, we assume the result true for n = k. Then for n = k + 1,
Au (B,n-~.~TB~~B,+~)
= A u ((Bin---nB,)nB,+,)
= [Au (B,n-.-nBk)l n [AU&+1] (by Dist(ii))
= [(AuB,)n*** rl (AUB,)] rl (s‘iUBk+l) (by the inductive hypothesis)
= (AuB,)n ..a n (AuB,)n (AUB~+~)
DIFFERENCE AND SYMMETRIC DIFFERENCE

2.5. Using a Venn diagram, determine whether the following conditions are compatible.
(i) AnB= $3 (iii) (CnA) - B = g
(ii) (CnB) -A = $73 (iv) (CnA)U(CnB)U(AnB) # $3
Solution:
In Fig. 2-15, (iv) says that E u F U G u H is non-empty. (i) says that E U F is empty. Hence
G U H is non-empty. (iii) says that G is empty and (ii) says that H is empty. Hence G U H*is empty.
Therefore conditions (i)-(iv) are inconsistent.
Fig. 2-15 Fig. 2-16
2.6. Show that AA (BAC) = (AAB)AC.
Solution:
In Fig. 2-16, AAB=EuHuGuJ and C=HuIuJUK, and so (AAB)AC = EU
GuIuK. BAC = FuGuHUK and A = EuFUHUI, and soAA(BAC) = GUKUIUE.
Thus (AAB)AC = A A(BAC).
Observe that E G K I
(AAB)AC = mnBnCjU$ii%$nnnCjm
A logical derivation of this result is rather tedious and is left to the reader. It is easiest to prove
by showing (AAB)AC c AA(BAC) and AA(BAC) c (AAB)AC.
2.7. Show that A A B = p if and only if A = B.
Solution:
AAB = $3 ifandonlyif (A-B)u(B-A) = $3,
ifandonlyif A-B = @ and B-A = $3,
ifandonlyif AcB and BcA,
if and only if A = B.
Note: By C(xi), page 35, this result can be restated as
A = B ifandonlyif (Anl?)u(AnB) = @
2.8. Prove the cancellation law: If A A B = A AC, then B = C.

Solution:
Assume A A B = A A C. Then A A A A B = A A A A C (parentheses can be omitted by virtue
of Problem 2.6). Since AAA = 0, we obtain: QAB= @AC. But @AD = D for any D.
Hence B = C.
2.9. Prove the distributive law: A fl (B A C) = (A nB) A (An C).

Solution:
An(BAC) = An((B-C)u(C-B))
= (An(B-C))b(An(C-B)) = ((An@-C)u((AnC)-B)
= ((Arm)- (AnC))u ((AnC)- (AM?)) = (AnB) A (AnC)
The problem can also be handled by means of a Venn diagram, as in Problem 2.6.
2.10, Prove C(iii): A f~B = 2 Ui?, logically and pictorially.

Solution:
Logical Proof.
AnB = {x: xEX & ze(AnB)}
= {x: xEX & (zBA v x@B)}
= {x: (xEX & x4A)v (zEX & z4B))

= {x: zEX&zGA}u{x: xEX&zBB} = /iuS
Pictorial Proof. See Fig. 2-17 and 2-18.
A: vertical, B: horizontal
Unshaded region: A nB Marked region: A U fi
Fig. 2-17 Fig. 2-18
2.11. Prove C(viii): AcB if and only if I?GA.

Solution:
Recall that A and B are subsets of some fixed universe X. Then
AcB ifandonlyif,foranyxinX,ifxEA,thenxEB,
if and only if, for any x in X, if x 4 B, then x B A,t
if and only if, for any x in X, if x E B, then x E A,
if and only if B CA.
2.12. Using mathematical induction prove the generalized DeMorgan Law C(iii’):
AIn--. nA, = A,uA,u~~~ uA,
Solution:
It is obvious for n = 1. The case m= 2 is simply C(iii). Assume the result true for n = k.
Then for n = k + 1,
Aln -.-nA,nA,+, = (Aln---nAk)nA,+,

= A,n ...nA.uA,+, (by C(iii))
zz (A,u... uA,) u A, + I (by inductive hypothesis)
= A,u . . . uA,uA,+,
tWe have used here the logical law of contraposition: P --) Q is logically equivalent to 1 Q --) 1 P.
2.13. Prove: AUB = AnB and AnB = A-.

Solution :
WY
By De Morgan’s law C(ii), A UB = A flfi. Hence AuB = AnB. But AT=AuB, by C(i).
-
Likewise, by De Morgan’s law C(iii), AnB=AuB. Hence AnB=AnB=A-.
2.14. Prove: (1)(AuB)nA = BnA (3) (AnB)uB = B

(2)(AnB)uA = BuA (4) (AuB)nB = B
Solution:
(1) (AuB)nA = (AnA)u(Bnd) = Qu(BnA) = BnA.
(2) (AnB)uA = (AuA)n(Buii) = Xn(But?) = BuA.
(3) (AnB)uBcBuB = B. Also, BC(AnB)uB. Hence (AnB)uB = B.
(4) (AuB)nB = (AnB)u(BnB) = (AnB)uB = B (by(3)).
2.15. (a) Show that the four ellipses in the diagram below form an appropriate Venn
diagram for four sets.
(b) Using the diagram of part (a), what conclusion can you draw from the following
assumptions?
(i) C c (BnD) u (DnB).
(ii) Everything in both A and C is either in both B and D or in neither B nor D.
(iii) Everything in both B and C is either A or II.
(iv) Everything in both C and D is either in A or B.
Solution:
(a) Show that the fifteen regions of the diagram cover all possible cases:
AnBnCnb, AnBncnD, AnBnCnD, AnBnCnD, AnBnCnD,
AnBncnb, AnBnCni?, AnBnCnD, AnBncnD, AnBncnD,
AnBnCnD, Anl?nCnb, AnBncnb, Anl?nCnb, AnL?nCnD.
(b)c = $3.
2.16. Algebra of Sets and Algebra of Logic. Given a statement form C in 1, &, v, let S(C)
be the expression obtained from C by substituting -, n, U for 1, &, v respectively.
Example:
S((AvB) & 1C) = (AUB)ne
(a) Prove: A is logically equivalent to B if and only if S(A) = S(B) holds for all sets
(where the statement letters of a statement form C are interpreted in S(C) as set
variables ranging over all subsets of a fixed universe).
(b) Prove that A logically implies B if and only if S(A) c S(B) holds for all sets.
Solution:
(4 If we replace each statement letter 1 in A by MEL, then the resulting sentence is equivalent to
x E S(A) (since x E W,n W2 if and only if z E W, & x E W,; z E W, u W, if and only if
XEW, v xEW,; and x E I? if and only if 1 (z E W)). Hence if A is logically equivalent to B,
then x E S(A) if and only if x ES(B), which implies that S(A) = S(B). Conversely, assume that
A is not logically equivalent to B. In general if we are given a truth assignment to the state-
ment letters in an arbitrary statement form C, and if we replace statement letters which are
T by (0) and statement letters which are F by 8, then, under this substitution of sets for
statement letters, S(C) = {@d> if C is T under the given assignment, and S(C) = @ if C
is F under the given assignment. This holds because, under the correspondence associating (@}
with T and $ZJwith F, the truth-functional operations correspond to the set-theoretic operations
(where sets are restricted to subsets of the universe {@}).
-IT = F <a>=@
-IF = T G = {Q)
T&T = T 03 n Cal = {@I
T&F = F&T = F 18) n P = 0 n ~~1 = Qi
F&F = F On@ = @
TvT = TvF = FvT = T ($31 u (81 = {@I u 8 = 0 u {@d) = 181
FvF = F @ue, = 17,
Since A is not logically equivalent to B, there is a truth assignment making one of them T
and the other F, say A is T and B is F. Then under the substitution of {$3} for the true state-
ment letters and of $3 for the false statement letters, S(A) = {@> and S(B) = $3. Hence
S(A) = S(B) does not always hold.
Remark: Lurking behind this rather long-winded discussion is what in mathematics is

called an “isomorphism” between the structures
0, Fl, 1, &, v) and ({WI, a>, -, n, U)
Note that we also have shown that an equation S(A) = S(B) holds for all sets if and only if
it holds in the domain {{@}, @} of all subsets of {@}.
(b) A logically implies B if and only if A & B is logically equivalent to A. By part (a), the latter
holds if and only if S(A & B) = S(A) always holds. But S(A & B) = S(A) nS(B), and
S(A) nS(B) = S(A) if and only if S(A) r S(B).
2.17. Define ordered n-tuples (for n z 3) by induction:
@1,x2, . . .. x,) = ((Xl, 372, * . ., Xn-i), xn)
Thus (CC,, x2, xB) = ((xl, x2), x3) and (XI, 22, ~3,x4 = ((PI, GA ~3)~~4). Prove that if
(x1,x2,..., x,) = (ul,uz ,..., u,,), then X~=UI, XZ,=U~, . . . . xn=un.
Solution:
We already have proved this result for n = 2. Now assume it is true for n = k h 2, and we
shall prove it must then hold for k + 1. We have, by assumption,
(Xl, Q, . . .. xk, zk+l) = &, u2, ..-,Uk,Uk+l)
Hence by definition,
((Xl, x21 . - ‘, xk), ++I) = (@,, US3. . *I uk), %+l)
By the result for n = 2, we conclude xk+, = uk+ I and (xl. 22, . . . ,zk) = (u,, up, . . . , uk). But the
latter equation, by virtue of the inductive hypothesis, implies x1 = U1, 52 = us, . . . , xk = uk.
FINITE, INFINITE, DENUMERABLE, AND COUNTABLE SETS

2.18. Prove that the set W of all ordered pairs of non-negative integers is denumerable.
Solution :
Arrange W in the following infinite array:
(0, 0) (0, 1) (0, 2) a 3) (0,4) ...
...
Enumerate the ordered pairs as indicated by the arrows, going up each diagonal from left to right.
Notice that the pair (i, j) appears in the [((i + j)(i + j + 1)/2) i- (j + l)]th place in the enumeration.
This can be seen as follows: all pairs in the same diagonal have the same sum. Adding up all
pairs in diagonals preceding the one containing (i, j), we obtain
1+2+ 0.. + (ifj) = (i+j)(i+j+1)/2
There are j pairs in the same diagonal as (i, j) and preceding (i, j).
2.19. Prove that the set of all non-negative rational numbers is denumerable.
Solution:
Every non-negative rational number corresponds to a fraction m/n, where (i) m and n are
non-negative integers, (ii) n St 0, and (iii) m and n have no common integral factors other than 51.
We can associate the ordered pair (m, n) with m/n, and use the enumeration given in Problem 2.18,
merely omitting those pairs (m, n) which do not satisfy conditions (i)-(iii).
2.20. The set A of all real roots of all nonzero polynomials with integral coefficients (such
roots are called real algebraic numbers) is denumerable.
Solution:
Any nonzero polynomial has only a finite number of roots. First list the finite set of all real
roots of all polynomials of degree at most one whose coefficients are in magnitude 5 1 (i.e. whose
coefficients are either 0, 1, or -1). Then list the finite set of all real roots of all polynomials of
degree 5 2 whose coefficients are in magnitude f 2, etc. In general, at the nth step we list the
finite set of all real roots of all polynomials of degree 5 n whose coefficients are in magnitude 5 n.
Of course, we omit repetitions. In this way, we obtain an enumeration of all real algebraic numbers.
That the set A is not finite follows from the fact that all integers belong to A.
2.21. Show that the set of all real numbers is not countable.
Solution:
Let R, be the set of all real numbers z such that 0 f z < 1. It suffices to show that RI is
not countable, since any subset of a countable set is countable. Every x in RI is representable as
a unique infinite decimal
2 = .a1a2a3. . .
where the infinite decimal does not end with an infinite string of 9’s. (Thus although a decimal
such as .1362000 . . is also representable as .1361999.. ., we shall use only the first representation.)
Assume now that RI can be enumerated:
Xl = .u11a,2a13.. .
x2 = .a2la22a23.. .
. . .. . . . . . .. . . .. . . .
Xk = aaklak2ak3. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Construct a decimal y = .b,b,b,. . . as follows:

0 if aii f 0
bi =
{ 1 if aii = 0
Thus, for all i, aii # bi. But then, y is in RI and is different from all of the numbers x1, xs, . . .
(since the decimal representation of y differs from that of Xi in the ith place). This contradicts
the assumption that the sequence x1, x2, . . . exhausts RI.
2.22. Given two sets A and B. We say that A has the same cardinality as B if there is a
one-one correspondence between A and B. We say that A has smaller cardinalitg
than B if there is a one-one correspondence between A and a subset of B but A does
not have the same cardinality as B.
Prove that, for any set A, A has smaller cardinality than the set ‘Z-‘(A) of all sub-
sets of A (Cantor’s Theorem).
Solution:
(1) There is a one-one correspondence between A and a subset of ‘P(A). Namely, to each element
x of A associate the set {x} in T(A). Clearly if x and y are distinct elements of A, {x} Z {y}.
(2) We must show that there is no one-one correspondence f between A and T(A). Assume, on
the contrary, that there is such a one-one correspondence f. Let C = {x : x GA & x 4 f(z)>.
Thus C consists of all elements x of A such that x is not a member of the corresponding
subset f(x) of A. But Cc A. Hence CE T(A). So there must be an element y in A such
that f(y) = C. Then by definition of C, y E C if and only if y 4 f(y). Since f(y) = C, it
follows that yE C if and only if y 4C. But either yE C or y4 C. Hence yE C & y 4 C,
which is a contradiction.
FIELD OF SETS
2.23. Prove that the collection 7 of all subsets B of X such that either B or I? is countable
is a field of sets.
Solution:
Assume BE p. Then either B or B is countable. Hence BE p. Assume now that A is also
in 7.
Case 1: B is countable. Then A n B is countable. Hence A n B E p.
Case 2: A is countable. Then A r? B is countable. Hence A n B E T.
Case 3: B is countable and A is countable. Hence A U B is countable. But An B = A UB.

Therefore A n B E T.
2.24. Let X be the set of all integers, and let k be a fixed integer. Let G be the collection
of all subsets B of X such that, for any u in B, both u + k and u - k are also in B.
(This means that a shift of k units does not alter B.) Show that S is a field of sets.
Solution:
Let B E 6. Assume u E B. Hence u 4 B. So u - k 4 B. (For, if u - k E B, then
u = (u - k) + k E B.) Also, u + k E fi. (For, if u+kEB, then u = (u+k)-kkB.) Thus
B E 6. Assume now that A and B are in 6. Let us consider A n B. Assume u E A nB. Then
uEA & uEB. Hence u*kEA & u%kEB. Therefore u -Ck E A n B. Thus, A nB E g.
Additional question: How many elements does 6 have?
NUMBER OF ELEMENTS IN A FINITE SET

2.25. Derive the equality
#(AuBuC) = #(A) + #(B) + #(C)
- #(AnB) -
#(AnC)- #(BnC) (1)
+ #(AnBnC)
for arbitrary finite sets A, B and C.
Solution:
Take any element x in A u B u C. If x is in precisely one of the sets A, B, C, then x is
counted once on the right side of (1). (For example, if z E B nki n 6, then x is counted only
in #(B).) If x belongs to precisely two of the sets A, B, C, then x will be counted twice in the
positive sense on the right side and once in the negative sense. (For example, if x E A nBn C,
then z-cis counted twice in the positive sense in #(A) and #(C), and x is subtracted once in #(AnC).)
Lastly, if x belongs to A n B n C, then x is counted in every term on the right side, four times
in the positive sense and three times in the negative sense. Thus the net effect of the right side of
(I) is to count the number of elements in A U B U C.
2.26. If a boating club of 75 members admitted only owners of sailboats or powerboats,

and if 48 members owned sailboats and 33 members owned powerboats, how many
members owned both sailboats and powerboats?
Solution :
Let A = the set of all members owning sailboats, and B = the set of all members owning
powerboats.
#(AuB) = #(A) + #(B) - #(AnB)
75 = 48+33-#(AnB)
Hence #(A n B) = 6.
2.27. Among 50 students taking examinations in mathematics, physics and chemistry, 37

passed mathematics, 24 physics and 43 chemistry; at most 19 passed mathematics and
physics, at most 29 mathematics and chemistry, and at most 20 physics and chemistry.
What is the largest possible number that could have passed all three?
Solution:
Let M, P, C stand for the collections of students passing mathematics, physics and chemistry,
respectively.
#(MuPuC) = #(M) + #(P) + #(c) - #(MnP) - #(Mnc) - #(PnC) + #(MnPnC)
50 2 37 + 24 + 43 - #(MnP) - #(MnC) - #(PnC) + #(MnPnC)
Hence
#(MnPnC) L #(MnP) + #(MnC) + #(Pnc) - 54
5 19 + 29 + 20 - 54 = 14
2.23. List all subsets of {@, {@}>.
2.26. (z : z is a real number & z2 < 0) = ?
2.30. Prove: BuC=@ ifandonlyif B=@ & C=@.
2.31. Prove: If A uB = A for all sets A, then B = 0.
2.32. Show with an example that A U B n C requires parentheses to be unambiguous.
2.33. Prove: If BcA & CGA, then BuCCA; and if AcB & AcC, then AcBnC.
2.34. Prove: If Cc_A, then BnCcA and CcAuB.
2.35. Prove: F(A) n T’(B) = T(A nB).
2.36. Is T(A) u T(B) = T(A uB)? If not, give a counterexample.
2.37. (5 : 5 is an integral multiple of 2} n {z : x is an integral multiple of 3) = ?
2.38. Disprove the cancellation law: If AnB=AnC, then B =C.
In Problems 2.39-2.54, determine whether the given equation is always true, using rigorous logical
methods and also, if possible, Venn diagrams. If an equation is not always true, specify a counterexample.
2.39. (AuB)n(BuC)n(CuA) = (AnB)w(BnC)u(CnA).
2.40. A - (B-C) = (A-B)u(AnBnC).
2.41. An(B-C) = (AnB) -(AnC).
2.42. Au(B-C) = (AuB) - (AuC).
2.43. A - (BnC) = (A-B)u(A-C).
2.44. A-(AnB) = A-B.
2.45. An B = A - (A-B).
2.46. AuB = Au(B-A).
2.47. (A-Ou(B-O = (AuB) -C.
2.48. A u(BAC) = (AuB) A (AuC).
2.49. A-(BAC) = (A-B)A(A-C).
2.50. A-B = AuB.
2.51. /f-l? = B-A.
2.52. AAB = AA&
2.53. AAB = (AnB)u(AnB).
2.54. AAB=AAB=AAB.
2.55. Let Z = the set of integers = {. . ., -2, -l,O, 1,2, . . .); N = the set of non-negative integers =
ml, 2, . . .>; Np = the set of non-positive integers = (0, -1, -2 , . . . ); E = the set of even integers;
P = the set of prime numbers. Find: N n (Np), Z - N, Z - (Np), N - (Np), N u (Np), N A (Np),
Z-E, En P.
2.56. Prove that A = B is equivalent to each of the following conditions.

(i) A-B = B-A.
(ii) A u B = A n B.
(iii) AuC = BuC& AnC = BnC.
2.57. Prove that A c B is equivalent to each of the following conditions.

(i) AAB = B-A, (ii) AuB = X.
2.58. Prove:AAB = AuB ifandonlyif AnB=@.
2.59. Prove: A s A if and only if A = $3, and A c A if and only if A = X.
2.60. Using Venn diagrams, determine the compatibility of the following conditions.
(i) (AnB) u C = A -B and
CnA = BnA.
(ii) A-(B-C) c CUB and AnBnC = $3 and C-BGA.
(iii) (B-A)nC # @ and C-A c C-B.
2.61. Prove the following identities.

(i) A,uA,u~~~uA, = (AI-A2)~(As-A,)~*--u(A,-,-A,)
u (4 - A,)u (A,nA,n ...n A,)
= A, u (4 -A,)u(A,- (A,uA,)) u (A4- (A,uA,uA,))u ...
u&z- (A,uA,u ...uA,_,))
(ii) A,nA,n...nA, = Al- [(A,-A,)u(A,-A,)u..~u(A,-A,)].
(iii) (A, -B,)n(A,-B,)n...n(A,-B,) = (A,nA,n...nA,)-(B,uB,u~~~uB,).
2.62. Simplify the following expressions.
(i) (AnB) u C n fi, (ii) ((Au B) n A) u Bn.
2.63. Find the set-theoretic operations corresponding to the truth functions for + and c).
2.64. Determine whether each of the following sets of ordered pairs is a function,
0) ((2, Y) : x and y are human beings and x is the father of y}.
(3 {lx, Y) : x and y are human beings and y is the father of x}.
(iii) {(x, y) : x and y are real numbers and x2 + y2 = l}.
(iv) {(x, y) : (5 = 1 & y = 2) v (5 = -1 & y = 0)).
2.65. For each of the following functions f from the set of integers Z into I, determine whether f is a
function from Z onto Z and also whether f is one-one.
x+ 1 if x is even
(i) f(x) = 2x + 1 (iii) f(x) =
{ x- 1 if x is odd
(ii) f(x) = -x (iv) f(x) = x2 - 3x -I-5
2.66. Prove: The set of all rational numbers is denumerable.
2.67. Prove: The set of all irrational real numbers is not countable.
2.68. By a left-open interval of the set R of real numbers, we mean either an interval
(a, b] = {x : a < x f b}
or an infinite interval of the form
(a,m) = (5: a<x} or (-a, a] = {x: x f b}
Let T be the collection of sets of real numbers consisting of @, R, and all unions of a finite number
of left-open intervals. Show that 7 is a field of sets.
2.69. (1) For finite sets A, B, C, D, derive the formula

#(AuBuCuD) = #(A) + #(B) + #(C) + #(D)
- #(AnB) - #(AnC) - #(AnD) - #(BnC) - #(BnD) - #(CnD)
+ #(AnBnC) + #(AnBnD) + #(AnCnD) + #(BnCnD)
- #(AnBnCnD)
(2) Generalize the result of (1) to any finite sets A,, . . ., A,.
2.70. In an advertising survey of a hundred coffee and tea drinkers, 70 people were found to drink coffee
at times, and 30 people drank both tea and coffee. How many people sometimes drank tea?
2.71. Among Americans taking vacations last year, 90% took vacations in the summer, 65% in the winter,
10% in the spring, 7% in the autumn, 55% in the winter and summer, 3% in the spring and summer,
6% in the autumn and summer, 4% in the winter and spring, 4% in the winter and autumn,
3% in the spring and autumn, 3% in the summer, winter and spring, 3% in the summer, winter and
autumn, 2% in the summer, autumn and spring, and 2% in the winter, spring and autumn.
What percentage took vacations during every season?
2.72. If A and B both contain n elements, prove that A -B and B -A have an equal number of elements.
Show that this is no longer the case when A and B are infinite.
2.73. (a) Show that the maximum number of sets obtainable from A and B by applying the union and
difference operations is eight. (b) Show that the maximum number of sets obtainable from A, B, C
by applying the union and difference operations is 128 = 27. (Hint: How many regions appear in
the Venn diagram for A, B, C?) (c) Generalize (b) to the case of n sets Al, . . ., A,.
2.74. (a) Prove: (AnBnC) u (AnBnD) u (AnCnD) u (BnCnD)
= (AuB)n(AuC)n(AuD)n(BuC)n(BUD)n(CUD).
(5) Prove: (AnB)u(AnC)u(AnD)u(BnC)u(BnD)u(CnD)
= (AuBuC) n (AuBuD) n (AuCuD) n (BuCuD).
(c)D Prove the following generalization of (a), (b) and Problem 2.41: Given n sets Al, . . ., A,.
Let k f n. Show that the union U of all intersections of k of the sets A,, . . ., A,, is equal
to the intersection I of all unions of n - k + 1 of the sets A,, . . . , A,. (Note: In Problem
2.41, n = 3, k = 2; in (a), n = 4, k = 3; in (b), n = 4, k = 2.) Hint: Prove U CZ and Zc U.
Chapter
Boolean Algebras
3.1 OPERATIONS
An n-ary operation on a set Y is defined to be any function f which, to each n-tuple :
(Yl, * . . , yn) of elements 2j1,. . ., yn in Y, assigns an element f(yl, . . ., yn) in Y. A more
traditional way of asserting that f is an n-ary operation on Y is to say that Y is closed
under the function f.
Example 3.1.
Addition, multiplication and subtraction are binary operations on the set of integers. (We use “binary”
instead of “2-ary”.) The function f such that f(z) = x - 1 for every integer x is a singulary operation
on the set of all integers. (W e use “singulary” instead of “1-ary”.)
Example 3.2.
The subtraction function x - y is not a binary operation on the set of non-negative integers, because :
the value x-y is not always a non-negative integer. The division function x/y is not a binary _
on the set of positive integers. (Why?)
3.2 AXIOMS FOR A BOOLEAN ALGEBRA

By a Boolean algebra we mean a set B together with two binary operations A and v on
B, a singulary operation ’ on B, and two specific elements 0 and 1 of B such that the follow-
ing axioms hold.
(1) For any x and y in B, x v y = y v x
Commutative Laws
(2) Foranyx andgin B, x r\y = yr\ x
(3) Foranyx,y,xinB, x~(yvx) = (x/zy)v(x~x)
Distributive Laws
(4) For any x, y, x in B, x v (y A x) = (xv y) A (x v x)
(5) For any x in B, x v 0 = x.
(6) For anyx in B, x A 1 = X.

(7) Foranyx in B, XV x’ = 1.
(8) For any x in B, x A x’ = 0.

(9) 0 # 1.
A Boolean algebra will be designated by a sextuple (B, A, V, ‘, 0,l). Sometimes one refers
to the set B as a Boolean algebra, but this is just a loose misuse of language.
Example 3.3.
(a) The two-element Boolean algebra
LB, = ({@,{@I>, n, u,-,t%{t%)
where B = {@, {@>I; A = the ordinary set-theoretic intersection operation n; v = the ordinary
set-theoretic union operation U; ’ = the ordinary set-theoretic operation of complex
0 = (d; and 1 = {Q}. In Chapter 2, we have verified properties (l)-(9). Of course, we first
that n, U and - are operations on (@, {(d}}.
52
CHAP. 31 BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS 53
I
_I (b) The Boolean algebra of all subsets of a non-empty set A, under the usual operations of inter-
section, union, and complementation, and with $?Jand A as the distinguished elements 0 and 1:
(T(A), n, U,- , $?l,A). When there is no danger of confusion, we shall refer to this Boolean algebra
I simply as T(A). Part (a) is a special case of (b) when A = (0). (Notice that we have omitted the case
I where A = $3; in this case, 0 = $8 = A = 1, violating Axiom (9).)
j \- Example 3.4. (This example should be omitted by those not familiar with elementary number theory.)
Let B be the set of all positive integers which are integral divisors of 70. Thus,
!
I B = {1,2,5,7,10,14,35,70}
For any z and y in B, let x A y be the greatest common divisor of r and y, let xv y be the least common
I
multiple of x and y, and let x’ = 70/x. (For example, 5 A 14 = 1, 5 v 14 = 70, 10 /\.35 = 5, 10 v 35 = 70,
5’ = 14, 10’ = 7.) Then (B, A, v, ‘, 1,70) is a Boolean algebra. Verification of Axioms (l)-(9) uses ele-
mentary properties of greatest common divisor and least common multiple.
c Example 3.5.
It seems evident that a set of sentences closed under the operations of conjunction, disjunction and
negation should form a Boolean algebra. However, this is not quite so. For example, A &B and B &A
are not equal, but only logically equivalent. Thus we should have to replace the equality sign = in Axioms
(l)-(9) by the relation of logical equivalence. In addition, 0 could be any sentence of the form A 8~ lA,
and 1 could be any sentence of the form A v 1 A. If we wish to retain the equality sign = with its usual
meaning (i.e. identity), then we may proceed as follows. By the statement bundle [A] determined by a
statement form A, we mean the set of all statement forms which are logically equivalent to A. Then, it
is clear that: (i) [A] = [B] if and only if A is logically equivalent to B; (ii) if [A] # [B], then
[A] fl [B] = @. If K, and K2 are statement bundles, it is obvious that if A, and B, are statement forms in
K, and A, and B, are statement forms in K,,then A, & A, is logically equivalent to B, & B,, A, v A, is
logically equivalent to B, v B,, and 1 A, is logically equivalent to 1 B,. Therefore if we take an arbitrary
statement form C, from K, and an arbitrary statement form C, from K,,then we may define K, & K, to
be [C, & C,], K, v K, to be [C, v Cc], and K; to be [l C,]. If B is taken to be the set of all statement
bundles, 0 is taken to be [A & 1 A], and 1 is taken to be {A v 1 A], then (B, &, v, ‘, 0,l) is a Boolean
algebra. Verification of Axioms (l)-(9) reduces to well-known properties of the algebra of logic. (For
example, to check Axiom (l), we consider any statement bundles K, and K,, and we take any statement
forms C, and C, in K, and K, respectively. Then K, v K, = [C, v C,] and K, v K, = [C, v C,]. But
[C, v C,} = [C, v CJ, since C, v Cc is logically equivalent to C, v Cr.)
Terminology: x A y is called the meet of x and y.

x v y is called the join of x and y.
x’ is called the complement of x.
0 is called the zero element.
1 is called the unit element.
If it is necessary to distinguish the meet, join, complement, zero element and unit
element of a Boolean algebra % from those of another Boolean algebra, we shall add the
subscript 48: A%, v%, ‘TV, 0,, 1,.
Unless something is said to the contrary, we shall assume in what follows that
8 = (B, A, V, 0,l) is an arbitrary Boolean algebra.
Theorem 3.1. Uniqueness of the complement: If xvy=l and x~y=O, then y=x’.
/
Proof. First, y = y v 0 by Axiom (5)
= y v (XAX’) by Axiom (8)
= (y v x) A (y v x’) by Axiom (4)
I = (x v y) A (y v x’) by Axiom (1)
/
= lr,(yvx’) by hypothesis
= (yVx’)Al by Axiom (2)
= yvx’ by Axiom (6)
64 BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS [CHAP. 3
Second, x’ = 2’ v 0 by Axiom (5)

= x’v (x/Y\) by hypothesis
= (x’v x) A (x’v y) by Axiom (4)
= (x v x’) A (x’v y) by Axiom (1)
= 1 A (dVy) by Axiom (7)
= (X’VY) A 1 by Axiom (2)
= x’vy by Axiom (6)
= yvx’ by Axiom (1)
=Y by the first part above b
Corollary 3.2. For any x in B, (2’)’ = x. (Notation: We shall denote (2’)’ by z”, ((2’)‘)’ by
x“‘, etc.)
Proof. First, x’v x = x v z’ by Axiom (1)
= 1 by Axiom (7)
Second, z’ Ax = x A x’ by Axiom (2)
= 0 by Axiom (8)
Hence by Theorem 3.1, taking 2 to be x’ and y to be x, we obtain z = 2”. )
Theorem 3.3. Idempotence: For any x in B,

(9 XAX = L-i?, (ii) xvx = x
Proof.
(9 x = XAl by Axiom (6) (ii) x = xv0 by Axiom (5)

= x A (XV x’) by Axiom (7) = x v (x A x’) by Axiom (8)
= (X A 2) v (X A 2’) by Axiom (3) = (XV x) A (XV x’) by Axiom (4)
= (XAX)V 0 by Axiom (8) = (x V x) A 1 by Axiom (7)
= XAX by Axiom (5) = xvx by Axiom (6) )
i -; Definition: By the dual of a proposition concerning a Boolean algebra B, we mean the

proposition obtained by substituting v for A, A for V, 0 for 1, and 1 for 0, i.e. by exchanging
A and V, and exchanging 0 and 1.
Example3.6.
The dual of ZA(~VZ) = (ZAY)V(ZAZ) is ZV((YAZ) = (ZVY)A(SVZ), and vice versa. The
dual of z V tc’= 1 is z A a? = 0, and vice versa.
It is obvious that if B is the dual of A, then A is the dual of B.
-. Theorem 3.4. Duality Principle (Proof-theoretic version): If a proposition A is derivable

from Axioms (l)-(9), then the dual of A is also derivable from Axioms (l)-(9).
Proof. The dual of each of Axioms (l)-(9) is again an axiom: (1) and (2) are duals of
each other, and so are the pairs (3)-(4), (5)-(6), and (‘7)-(8). (9) is its own dual. Thus if in
a proof of A we replace every proposition by its dual, the result is again a proof (since
axioms are replaced by axioms), but this new proof is now a proof of the dual of A. )
CHAP., 31 BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS 55
The proof of Theorem 3.3 is twice as long as it need be. Since x v x = x is the dual of
x A x = x, it would have sufficed to prove x A x = x and then cite the Duality Principle to
obtain x v x = X. As a matter of fact, the proof of the Duality Principle is illustrated in
the proof of Theorem 3.3: the proof of (ii) is obtained by taking the duals of the proposi-
tions in the proof of (i).
Theorem 3.5. For all x, y, x in B, ni 1,i, 4 : 1

(9 XAO = 0
(ii) xv1 = 1
(iii) xr,(xvy) = x
Absorption Laws
(3 xv(xr\y) = x
(4 xv (yvx) = (xv y) v 2
Associative Laws
(vii) x A (yA 2) = (x Ay) A 2
(Viii) (x V y)’ = X’ A y’
De Morgan’s Laws
(ix) (x A y)’ = X’ V y’
(4 x V y = (X’ A y’)’
x A y = (X’V y’)’
(xi)
(xii) XAy’=O c) XAy-X
(xiii) 0’ = 1
(xiv) 1’ = 0
(xv) x A (X’V y) = x A y
(xvi) XV(X’Ay) = XVy
Proof. From now on, we usually will not cite the particular axioms or theorems being
used in a proof.
(i) x A 0 = (X A 0) V 0 = (X A 0) V (X A X’) = (X AX’) V (X A 0) = X A (X’V 0) = X A X’ = 0
(ii) is the dual of (i).
(iii) x A (XVy) = (XV 0) A (XVy) = X V (OAy) = x V 0 = X.
(iv) is the dual of (iii).
(V) Assume y AZ = 2 A 2 & y AX’ = 2 AX’. Then

‘$, = y A 1 = y A (XV X’) = (y A X) V (y AX’)
= (2 AX) V &A Xl) = 2 A (XV X’) = 2 A 1 = 2
(vi) We shall use (v), replacing y by x v (y v x) and x by (XV y) v x. Thus to apply (v) we
must show .
(a) (Z V (yv 2)) A X = ((Xv ZJ)v 2) A X and (b) (X v (y v 2)) A X’ = ((XV y) V 2) A X’
To prove (a): (x v (yv 2)) A x = x A (x v (y v 2)) = x by (iii). Also,

((x V y) V 2) A X = X A ((XV y) V 2)
= [x A (XV y)] V [X Ax]
= x v (x A 2) by (iii)
=x by (iv>
Thus (3 V (y V x)) A x = X = ((XV j/y) V 2) A x
To prove (b): (xV(yVi@)Ax’ = x’A(xV(yVx))
= (X’AX) v (X’ A (YvX))
= oV(x’A(yV2)) = X’A(z/Vx)
Also, ((xv@ V 2) A X’ = x’ A [(x V y) V i?] = (x’ A (x V y)) V (X’ A 2)
= [(x’Ax) v (X’AY)] v (X’AX)
= [o V (X’ A y)] V [X’ A x]
= ($‘A@ V (X’ Ax) = X’ A (YV 2)
Thus (xV@Vx))Ax’ = x’ A (y V 2) = ((X V ‘y) V 2) A X’
(vii) is the dual of (vi).

(viii) To prove (XV y)’ = x’ A y’, we use the uniqueness of the complement (Theorem 3.1).
We must show
(c) (XVY)A(X’AY’) = 0 and (d) (XVY)V(X’AY’) = 1
To prove (c): (XV@ A (X’AY’) = (X’AY’) A (Xv@
= [(x’ A y’) A x] V [(x’ A y’) A 2/]
= [x A (x’ A y’)] V [X’ A (y’ A 2/)]
= [(x Ax’) A y’] V [X’ A (y A y’)]
= [or\ 2/‘] V [X’ A o] = 0 V 0 = 0
To prove (d): (XV@ V (X’AY’) = [(xv@ V x’] A [(XVY) V y’]
= [x”’ (XV&] A [XV (Y”Y’)]
= [(X’Vx)Vy] A [XVl]
= [(xv x’) v y] A 1 = (x V X’) V y
=lvy=yvl=l
(ix) is the dual of (viii).
(x) By (viii), (XV y)’ = x’ A y’. Hence (xv y)” = (x’A y’)‘. But (z v y)” = xv y, by
Corollary 3.2.
(xi) is the dual of (x).
(xii) x = x A 1 = x A (y v y’) = (x A y) v (x A y’). Therefore x A y’ = 0 implies x = x A,y.
Conversely, assume x = x A y. Then

XAy’ = Ov(xr\y’) = (XAX’) V (XA\‘)
= ZA(X’V$/) = XA(XAY)’ = XAX’ = 0

(xiii) Since 0 v 1 = 1 and 0 A 1 = 0, we obtain 0’ = 1 by Theorem 3.1.
(xiv) is the dual of (xiii).
(XV) ZA(S’vfj) = (XAX’) v (XA~) = Ov (XA\) = Xhy.
(xvi) is the dual of (xv). )
3.3 SUBALGEBRAS
It is clear that a Boolean algebra (B, A, V, ‘, 0,l) has a unique zero element 0 and a unique
unit element 1. For, assume that x is also a possible zero element; in particular, x = z v x
forallxinB. Henceifwelet x=0, O=Ovz. But 0~x=z~0=z. Thus 0=x. Like-
wise, if u were a possible unit element, then 1 = 1 A u = u A 1 = %
The subset (0, l} is closedt under the operations A, V, ‘. For,
Ovl= l= Iv0 oA1 = 0 = IA0

0’ = 1
Iv1 = 1 IAl = 1
1’ = 0
ovo = 0 OAO = 0
Thus if we let ‘{o,l) denote the restrictions of the operations A, v, ’ to the set
A 10,1), v{~,~),
10, l>, then g* = V-4 11, A{o+ v{~,~), ‘{o,l), 0,l) is itself a Boolean algebra. Notice that
all we had to observe was that (0, l} is closed under the operations A, V, ‘; it is easy to check
that Axioms (l)-(9) are then automatically satisfied.
More generally, if A is any non-empty subset of B closed under the operations A, V, ‘,
then (A, AA9 vA, ‘A, 0, 1) is a Boolean algebra, where AA, vA, ‘A are the restrictions of the opera-
tions A, V, ’ to the set A. Observe that 0 and 1 must belong to A. For, if x E A, then x’ E A,
and thus we obtain 0 = x A x’ E A and 1 = x v x’ E A. The Boolean algebra (A, AA, vA, ‘A, 0,l)
is called a subalgebra of 48. In particular, the Boolean algebra 53* determined by (0, l} is
a subalgebra of 48. In fact, %* is the “smallest” subalgebra of %, since 3* is a subalgebra
of any other subalgebra of 5%
To show that a subset A of B is closed under A, V, I, it suffices to show that A is closed
either under A and ‘, or under v and ‘. For, if A is closed under A and I, then, for any
x,y in A, Xvy = (X’r\y’)‘EA. Likewise, if A is closed under v and ‘, then, for any
x, y in A, x A y = (X’ v y’)’ E A.
Example 3.7.
Let 9 be the Boolean algebra T’(K) of all subsets of an infinite set K under the usual set-theoretic
operations of intersection, union and complementation, and with $2 and K as the zero element and unit
element, respectively. Let A be the set of all subsets of K which are either finite or cofinite (i.e. the com-
plement of a finite set). Then A is closed under intersection, union and complement, and therefore A
determines a subalgebra of 9. In general, the subalgebras are the fields of subsets of K.
3.4 PARTIAL ORDERS

In a Boolean algebra 48, we define a binary relation L on B by stipulating that
x’y if and only if x A y = Xtt
Theorem 3.6. x 4 y if and only if x v y = y.
Proof. Assume x 4 y. Then

XVy = (XAy)Vy = y
(using Theorem 3.5(iv)). Conversely, if XV y = y, then

XAy = XA(XVy) = X
(using Theorem 3.4(iii)). )
Example 3.8.
In a Boolean algebra T(A), the relation x f y is equivalent to x c y, for any subsets x and y of A.
tRecal1 that A is said to be closed under the operations A, v, ’ if, for any x and 2/ in A, the objects
z A y, XV l/, and x’ are also in A.
ttThe symbol f should not be confused with the symbol for the usual ordering of integers or of real
numbers. If necessary, use 5% instead of 5.
Example 3.9.
In the Boolean algebra 9 associated with the propositional calculus (Example 3.4, if A and B are
statement forms, then [A] 5 [B] if and only if [A] A [B] = [A]. But [A] A [B] = [A&B]. Thus
{A] 5 [B] if and only if [A & B] = [A], i.e. if and only if A & B and A are logically equivalent. Clearly
A & B is logically equivalent to A if and only if A logically implies B. Thus [A] 5 LB] if and only if A
logically implies B (or, equivalently, if and only if A + B is a tautology).
Theorem 3.7. (PO 1) x L x (Reflexivity)

(PO 2) (x L y & y L x) + x 4 x (Transitivity)
(PO 3) (x ‘y & y” x)+ x = y (Anti-symmetry)
Proof.
PO 1) XAX = X.
(PO 2) Assume x A y = x and y A x = y. Then

XAX = (XAY) AZ = XA(YAX) = XAY = X
(PO 3) Assume x A y = x and y A x = y. Then

X=XAy=yAX=y 1
In general, a binary relation R on a set A is any subset of A x A, i.e. any set of ordered
pairs (u, v) such that u E A & v E A. For example, the relation of fatherhood on the set of
human beings is the set of all ordered pairs (x, y) such that x and y are people and x is the
father of y. In accordance with tradition, one often writes xRy instead of (x, y) E R.
A binary relation R on a set A satisfying the analogues of (PO 2) - (PO 3),

(2) (xRy & yRx) + XRX,
(3) (xRy & yRx) --f x = y,
is called a partial order on A.
A partial order on a set A is said to be reflexive if and only if xRx holds for all x in A,
while R is said to be G-reflexive on A if and only if xRx is false for all x in A. For example,
the ordinary relation 6 on the set of integers is reflexive while the relation < on the set of
integers is irreflexive. In Theorem 3.7 we have seen that the binary relation 4 on a
Boolean algebra % is a reflexive partial order.
If 4 is a reflexive partial order on a set A, we can define x < y to mean that x 4 y & x Z y.
Then we have
Theorem 3.8. (i) 1 (x < x)

(ii) (x<y & y&x) + x<x
(iii) (XL y & y< 2) + x < 2
(iv) (x< y & y<x) + x<x
(v) 1 (x < Y & Y < 4

(vi) < is an irreflexive partial order on A.
Of course, given an irreflexive partial order < on A, we can define a reflexive partial
order g on A as follows: x ‘y t, (x < y or x = y).
Let 4 be a partial order on a set A. An element x of A is said to be an upper bound of

a subset YcA if y’x for all y in Y. An element x of A is said to be a least upper bound
(lub) of a subset Y G A if and only if
(1) x is an upper bound of Y,
(2) 24 w for every upper bound w of Y.
Clearly, by (PO 3), a subset Y of A has at most one lub.
Similarly, an element x of A is said to be a lower bound of a subset Y G A if and only if
x 6 y for all y in Y; x is called a greatest lower bound (glb) of Y if and only if
(3) x is a lower bound of Y,
(4) w 6 x for every lower bound w of Y.
Again, by (PO 3), Y has at most one glb.
Example 3.10.
The usual order relation 5 on the set Z of integers is a partial order on 1. Any non-empty subset of Z
having an upper bound (respectively, lower bound) must have a lub (respectively, glb), which is, in fact,
the greatest element (respectively, smallest element) of the set. However, there are non-empty subsets
which have no lub, e.g. the set Z itself or the set of even integers.
Example 3.11.
The usual order relation 5 on the set R of real numbers is a partial order on R. Any non-empty
subset of R having an upper bound (respectively, lower bound) must have a lub (respectively, glb).
Example 3.12.
The usual order relation 5 on the set Q of rational numbers is a partial order on Q. However, in
this case, there exist non-empty subsets of Q which are bounded above but do not have a lub. An example
is the set of all positive rational numbers x such that x2 < 2. (This is just another way of saying that
fi is not rational.)
Examples 3.10-3.12 possess the additional property of connectedness:

(Conn): For any x and y in A, x ‘y or y L x.
A partial order satisfying (Conn) is called a total order (synonyms: simple order, linear
order). Not all partial orders are total orders.
Example 3.13.
The partial order c determined by the Boolean algebra of all subsets of (0, l} is not connected, for
we have neither (0) C (1) nor (1) c (0).
A partial order on a finite set A can be indicated by a diagram in which the elements
of A are pictured as points, and a point x has the relation to some point y if and only if y
can be reached from x by following a sequence of zero or more upward arrows. The order
relation G in the Boolean algebra of all subsets of {0, l} is pictured in Fig. 3-1, and the
order relation in the Boolean algebra of all subsets of (0, 1, 2} is shown in Fig. 3-2.
0
. Fig. 3-1 Fig. 3-2
I
The partial order 5 determined by a Boolean algebra 48 has a special property (L) not
possessed by all partial orders.
Theorem 3.9. (L) For any x and y, {x, y} has both a lub (namely, XV y) and a glb (namely,
XAY).
Proof.x 4 XV y (since x A (XV y) = x), and similarly, y L xv y. Thus xvy is an

upper *bound of {x, y} . Now assume w is any upper bound of {x, y}. This means that x 4 w
and y&w, i.e. x A w = x and y A w = y. Then (XVY)AW = (XAW)V(~AW) = xvy,
i.e. xv y L w. Thus XV y is the Iub of {x, y). The proof for x A y is left to the reader. )
3.5 BOOLEAN EXPRESSIONS AND FUNCTIONS. NORMAL FORMS

By a Boolean expression we mean any expression built up from the variables x, y, x, xl,
y1, 21, a!, y2, 22, . . . by applying the operations A, v, ’ a finite number of times.
In other
words, all variables are Boolean expressions, and if 7 and u are Boolean expressions, so are
(7 A u), (7 v U) and (#)t.
Example 3.14.
The following are Boolean expressions:
((XV (Y’)) A (z;)), (b”z) ” (b’) “1/h (b A (2 ” X))‘), ((((Y’)‘)A 2) A I//), (((Id’) A (2A II))
We shall use the same conventions for omitting parentheses as were used for statement
forms in Chapter 1 (cf. page 5). For this purpose, the symbols A, V, ’are to correspond to &, V, 1.
Example 3.15.
Using the conventions for omitting parentheses, we can write the Boolean expressions of Example 3.14
as follows:
(XV u’) A Z;, (?/ A 2) V (2’ A 2/), ($4 A (2 V CC))‘, $/” A 2 A 2,/, 2/” A (2 A y)
Given a Boolean algebra B = (B, A, v, ‘, 0,l) and a Boolean expression ~(241,. . . , uk)
having its variables among ul, . . . ,?&, we can determine a corresponding Boolean function
Tqh, . . . ,G): for each k-tuple (bl, . . . , bk) of elements of B, ~~(bl, . . ., bk) is the element of
B obtained by assigning the values bl, . . . , bk to UI,. . . , uk respectively, and interpreting the
symbols A, V, ’ to mean the corresponding operations in %. (In order to make the corre-
sponding function unique, we always shall list the variables ~1, . . . , uk in the order in which
they occur in the list x, y, x, x1, yl, xl, x2, y2, x2, . . . . For example, y v x’ determines the
function f(x, y) = y v x’; thus f(l,O) = 0 and f(O,l) = 1.)
Example 3.16.
The Boolean expression z v y’ determines the following function f(x, w) with respect to the two-element
Boolean algebra 53,.
f(O,O) = 1, f(0, 1) = 0, fU, 0) = 1, f(l, 1) = 1
Notice that, if bl, . . . , b, are in (0, l} and 5(u1, . . ., u,) is a Boolean expression, then
P(b1, . . . , bn) is also in (0, l}, since (0, l} is closed under A, v and ‘.
Observe also that different Boolean expressions may determine the same Boolean func-
tion. For example, x A (y v 2) and (z A y) v ( x Ax) always determine the same Boolean
functions.
tMore precisely, o is a Boolean expression if and only if there is a finite sequence T~, . . . ,T, such that T,, is
c, and, if 1 f i f n, then either 7i is a variable or there exist j, k < i such that 7i is (Tj A 7k) or Ti is
(Tjv Tk) or Ti is (7;).
Theorem 3.10. Given a Boolean expression T(U), which may contain other variables
Ul, . . ., uk as well as u. Then the equation
T(u) = [T(o) Au’] V [T(l) Au]
is derivable from the axioms for Boolean algebras.
Proof. See Problem 3.7, page 66. )
Now we shall present a normal form theorem for Boolean algebras which is a gen-
eralization of the disjunctive normal theorem for propositional logic (Theorem 1.6). The
following notation will be convenient:
T if i=l
For any expression T, 2 =
# if i=O’
The symbol 2, with appropriate indices, will be used to indicate repeated use of V. In
particular, c U(OI)stands for a(O) v a(l), while 2 i ~(a,, cy2)stands for 0(0,0) v u(0, 1) v
a=0 n,=o nz=o
up, 0) v u(l, 1).
Theorem 3.11. (Disjunctive Normal Form) For any Boolean expression s(u~, . . . , Uk), the
equation
is derivable from the axioms for Boolean algebra (and therefore the corre-
sponding equation, with T replaced by 7%, holds in any Boolean algebra %).
Proof. See Problem 3.8, page 67. )
Example 3.17.
When k = 1, Theorem 3.11 reads
T(U) = i, h) A Ua = (7(o) AU’) V (~(1) AU)
When k = 2, we obtain
= (T(O,O)AU:AU~)V (T(~,~)AU;AZL~)
v (T(~,~)AZQAU;)V
(T(~,~)AZQAU~)
Example 3.18.
When 7 is zvv y, Theorem 3.11 states
X V v = [(o V 0) A 2’ A $1 V [(IV 0) A % A 2/‘] V [(o V 1) A 2’ Au] V [(IV 1) A 2 A v]
= [o A 2’ A y’] V [l A X A $,‘I V [l A 5’ A jj] V [l A X A f,]
= [X A y’] V [%‘A y] V [X A v]
Example 3.19.
The representation of (x v y) A (x’ v y’) in disjunctive normal form is
(5 V y) A (2’ V $,‘) = (0 A 5’ A 21’) V (1 A 5’ A 1/) V (1 A X A y’) V (0 A X A y)
= (X’AY) V (X Ay’)
-. Corollary 3.12. Let T(u~,. . . , Uk) and ~(ul, . . . ,uk) be Boolean expressions, and let 9 be
some Boolean algebra. If the Boolean functions s%(u~,. . . ,uk) and
0% (Ul, . . . , uk) are equal, then:
(a) the equation 7(U1,. . . , uk) = u(~I, . . . , t&k) is provable from the axioms
for Boolean algebras;
(b) 4 = UC for all Boolean algebras C.
Proof. (a) Since (0, I} C B, +((bl, . . . , bk) = dB(b1, . . . , bk) whenever bl, . . . , bk E (0, l}.
But rS(b1,. . ., bk) = Us(bl, . . . , bk) holds if and only if the corresponding equation
dbl, . . . , bk) = u(b1, . . . , bk) can be proved from the axioms for Boolean algebras. For,
the equations 0 A 0 = 0, 0 A 1 = 1 A 0 = 0, 1 A 1 = 1, etc., are all derivable from these axioms,
and the values rB(bl, . . ., &) and ~e(h, . . . , bk) are computable from these equations. Hence
by Theorem 3.11, T(u~,. . . , UI~)= ~(ul, . . . , uk) is derivable from the axioms.
(b) is an immediate consequence of (a). )
The remarkable thing about Corollary 3.12 is that, if an equation holds for one Boolean
algebra (in particular, if it holds for the two-element Boolean algebra 484, then it holds for
all Boolean algebras. To mathematicians it probably would not have been surprising if we
had only asserted that, if an equation holds for all Boolean algebras, then it is provable
from the axioms. This latter assertion follows, in fact, from the completeness theorem for
first-order logic (see Corollary 2.15(a), page 68 of [135]).
3.6 ISOMORPHISMS
A function @ is called an isomorphism from a Boolean algebra 9 = (B, As, vI) , ‘g, O,, 1%)
into a Boolean algebra C = (C, AC, vc, ‘c , 0,, lc) if and only if
(a) @ is a one-one function from B into C,
(b) for any x, y in B,
@,(X”,Y) = Q(X) “c NY)

@(X’S) = (@(X))‘C
Such a function @ is called an isomorphism from !B onto C if, in addition, Q is a function

from B onto C.
-I Theorem 3.13. Let + be an isomorphism from a Boolean algebra 9 into (respectively, onto)
a Boolean algebra C (with the notation given above). Then
(4 Wd = OC and +(l%) = 1,.

(b) It is not necessary to assume that
@(X VT3Y) = +(x) vc a(y) for all x, y in B
Alternatively, we could omit the assumption that
qx *ql Y) = G(X) AC WY)
(c) If o is an isomorphism from C into (respectively, onto) a Boolean
algebra D = (0, A?), v~, ‘9, 0,, l,), then the composite mapping+
o o @ is an isomorphism from % into (respectively, onto) D.
tThe composite mapping (or composition) 8 0~ is the function defined on the domain B of + such that
(co+)(x) = 8(@(x)) for each z in B. The inverse e-1 is the function whose domain is the range +P[B] of +
(here, +[B] = {a(z) : 2 E B}) and such that, for any y in +[B], (+-l)(y) is the unique x in B such that
Nx) = y.
(d) The inverse mapping a-’ is an isomorphism from the subalgebra of

C determined by @[B] onto 59, and, in particular, if @ is onto C, then
@-I is an isomorphism from C onto %
Proof.
(4 @(OS) = @(X/l, x3) = Q(X) AC @(X’%)
= a(x) AC (a(x))‘c = 0,
a(&) = @(OZ) = (@(Oa))‘C = 0: = 1,
(b) @(X “s y) = q(x% As y’g)‘s) = (aqx”B As Y’S))‘C

= (@(x’q ) AC @(@))t = ((@(x))t AC (@(@)‘c )t = Q(x) Vc a(y)
(c) First, o O@ is one-one. (If x f y, then a(x) z a(y) and therefore @(G(X)) f @(a(y)).)
Second, (0 0 @)(X’S) = O(cP(X’23))= O((@(X))‘C) = (@(Q(X)))‘9 = ((0 O@)(X))‘V
Lastly, (0 o @)(x A%3) = @(a@ AI( Y)) = @(a(x) AC @(Y)>

= 0(@(X)) f’v @(@(Y)) = (0 Oa)(x) Av (0 ’a)(Y)
(d) Assume x, w E +[B]. Then x = Q(X) and w = a,(y) for some x and y in B. Hence
x = +-l(x) and y = @-l(w). First, if x f w, then x f y (for, if x = z/, then x = Q(X) =
a(y) = w). Thus rp-l is one-one. Second, @(x V~ ‘~j) = a(x) vc a(y) = x vc w. Hence
a-‘(xvc w) = x vs y = a-‘(x) v.g Q-1 (w). Third, @(x’s) = (@(x))‘c = 2%. Hence
W’(X’C) = x’s = (a-‘(x))‘%. )
We say that 9 is isomorphic with C if and only if there is an isomorphism from 9 onto
C. From Theorem 3.13(d, c) it follows that, if % is isomorphic with C, then C is isomorphic
with 93,and if, in addition, C is isomorphic with D, then % is isomorphic with D. Isomorphic
Boolean algebras have, in a certain sense, the same Boolean structure. More precisely, this
means that any property (formulated in the language of Boolean algebras) holding for one
Boolean algebra also holds for any isomorphic Boolean algebra.?
Example 3.20.
Consider the two-element subalgebra C = {O,, l%} of any Boolean algebra FB. Let ?) be the Boolean
algebra whose elements are the integers 0 and 1 and whose operations are:
bD): ordinary multiplication, i.e. 0 in 0 = 0 A~ 1 = 1 AI) 0 = 0, 1~3 1 = 1.
(“VI: addition modulo 2, i.e. 0 ~9 0 = 0, 0 vn 1 = 1 vn 0 = 1, 1 vn 1 = 0.
(‘a): the function l-z, i.e. 0% = 1 and 1’3 = 0.
Then the function + on {O%, ls} such that *(OS) = 0 and +(ls) = 1 is an isomorphism of C onto ?).
3.7 BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS AND PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC

A statement form A and a Boolean expression 7 are said to correspond if 7 arises from
A by replacing 1, &, v by ‘, A, v (respectively) and by replacing the statement letters
A, B, C, AI, BI, Cl, . . . by x, y, x, x1, yl, x1, . . . (respectively).
*For a rigorous formulation of this assertion, see page 90 of [135].

Example 3.21.
A v (B & 1 C) corresponds to z v (y A 2’). 1 (1A & (B, v A)) corresponds to (x’ A (y1 v X))‘.
The statement form corresponding to a Boolean expression ‘Twill be denoted SF(T).
Theorem 3.14. The equation T = u holds for all Boolean algebras if and only if SF(T) is
logically equivalent to SF(a). Hence we have a decision procedure to deter-
mine whether T = (T holds for all Boolean algebras.
Proof. By Corollary 3.12, 7 = u holds for all Boolean algebras if and only if 7 = 0
holds for the two-element Boolean algebra C = ({F, T}, &‘z(~,~),v{~,~) , ‘{F.T), F, T), where
the operations L?L~~,~),
v{~,~), ‘{F,T) have the obvious meanings given by the usual truth tables.
These are given in detail in Problem 2.16, page 44. It is clear that 7 = Q holds for C if
and only if SF(T) and SF(o) always take the same truth values. (For, an assignment of
truth values, T or F, to the statement letters in SF(T) and SF( (T) corresponds to substitution
of the same truth values for the corresponding variables in T and u.) )
Example 3.22.
Considerthe equation XA (yvx) = (XA~) V (XAZ). The corresponding statement forms are
A & (BvC) and (A&B) v (A&C). To check that these statement forms are logically equivalent, we
substitute T and F for A, B, C in all possible ways and verify that the outcomes are the same. For
example, if A is F, B is T, and C is F, then A & (B v C) and (A&B) v (A &C) both are F. The com-
putation we make to determine this is essentially the same as the one we make to see that x A (y V z) =
F = (x A u) v (x AZ) when x is F, g is T, and x is F. (Namely, FA(TvF) = FAT = F and
(F A T) v (F A F) = F v F = F.)
Solved Problems
3.1. In a Boolean algebra, let x - y be defined as x A y’. Prove:
(a) x v y = x v (y- 2)
(b) x-(x-y) = XAy
1, (c) A non-empty subset A determines a subalgebra if and only if A is closed under

- and ‘.
(d) 5’ = 1 - x
(e) x 4 y t, x - y = 0 (i.e. x L y c* x A y’ = 0)
(f) x&O c* x=0

(9) xAy=o c* x-2/=%
(h) Z A (Y-X) = (ZAY) - (X AZ)
(i) Does x v (y -2) = (xv y) - (xvz) hold?
Solution:
(a) x v (2/ - 2) = X V (y A 5’) = (XV y) A (XV 5’) = (XV y) A 1 = X V y
UJ) X - (X - y) = 5 A (5 - y)’ = X A (5 A $,‘)’ = 5 A (Z’ V y”)
= 2 A (2’ V y) = (5 A Z’) v (X A 2/) = 0 V (Z A y) = X A 2/

/
(c) If A is a subalgebra and if x and y are in A, then x -p = x A y’ E A. Conversely, if A is

closed under - and ’, and if x and y are in A, then x -yEA, and therefore XAY=
x - (x-y) E A. Since A is closed under A and ‘, A is a subalgebra.
(4 1 -X = I,,%’ XZ 2’
(e) This is Theorem 3.5(xii).
(f) x-x = XA x’ = 0. Now use part (e) with y= 0.
(9) X--y = X t) XA2/‘= 2
f, X A y” = 0 (Theorem 3.5(xii))
f) XAy=o
(h) X A (2/ - 2) = X A (y A 2’) = Z A 2/ A 2’. On the other hand,

(X A y) - (X A 2) = (X A y) A (X A 2)’ = (5 A y) A (X’v 2’)
= ?/ A (X A (X’V 2’)) = y A (X A 2’) = X A y AZ’
(i) No. 1 v (1 -1) = Iv0 = 1. However, (Iv 1) - (1” 1) = 1 - 1 = 0.
3.2. In our axiom system for Boolean algebras, prove that Axiom (9), 0 # 1, is equivalent
(in the presence of the other axioms) to the assertion that the Boolean algebra contains
more than one element.
Solution :
Clearly, if 0 Z 1, then there is more than one element. Conversely, assume 0 = 1. Then
for any x, x = x A 1 = x A 0 = 0. (Notice that in proving results about Boolean algebras we have
not used Axiom (9).) Thus every element is equal to 0, and the Boolean algebra contains just one
element.
3.3. Let n be an integer greater than 1. Let B be the set of positive integers which are
divisors of n. If x and y are in B, define x’ = n/x, x A y = the greatest common
divisor (gcd) of x and y, z v y = least common multiple (lcm) of x and y. (This is a
generalization of Example 3.5.)
Show that (B, A, V, ‘,l, n) is a Boolean algebra if and only if n is square-free (i.e.
n is not divisible by any square greater than 1).
Solution:
Remember that the zero 0, and unit 1, of the algebra are the integers 1 and n respectively.
Axioms (l)-(6) and (9) represent simple properties of integers and of greatest common divisors and
least common multiples (cf., for example, [129]). However, Axioms (7) and (8) hold if and only if,
for all x in B, x and n/x have no factors in common (other than l), and this condition is equivalent
to n being square-free. (Example: if n = 60, which is not square-free, 6’ = 10 and 6 v 6’ =
Icm(6,10)=30#60=1~, 6 A 6’ = gcd (6,lO) = 2 # 1 = O,.)
SUBALGEBRAS
3.4. In the Boolean algebra of all divisors of ‘70 (see Example 3.4), find all subalgebras.
Solution:
We must find all subsets A of {1,2,5, ‘7,10,14,35, ‘70) closed under A and ‘. Remember that
x A y = gcd (x, g) and x’ = 70/x.
A, = {1,70) = {Oqp Is,)
A, = (1, 2, 35, 70)
A, = (1, 5, 14, 70)
A, = (1, 7, 10, 70)
A5 = (1, 2, 5, 7, 10,14, 35, 70)
3.5. (a) Given a subset D of a Boolean algebra 48, show that the intersection? of all sub-
algebras of B containing D as a subset is itself a subalgebra of 9 (called the sub-
algebra generated by D).
(b) What is the subalgebra generated by the empty set $9?
(c) If D = {b}, what is the subalgebra generated by D ?
Solution:
(a) Let C be the intersection of all subalgebras containing D. Clearly, if x and y are in C, then
x A y and x’ are in all subalgebras containing D and hence also are in C.
(b) {(O%, 1%) is a subalgebra containing @ as a subset and is contained in all other subalgebras.
Hence (0%) Is} is the subalgebra generated by 0.
(c) {O%, 1%) b, b’} is a subalgebra containing {b} and is contained in every subalgebra contain-
ing {b}. Therefore {O%, l,, b, a’} is the subalgebra generated by {b}.
BOOLEAN EXPRESSIONS AND FUNCTIONS. NORMAL FORMS

‘f 3.6. If D is a subset of a Boolean algebra 9, show that the subalgebra C generated by D
; ,l~l_consists of the set C of all values obtained by substituting elements of D for the
1
:’.,
4 variables in all Boolean functions.
‘. Solution:
Every such value, being obtained from elements of D by A, v, ‘, must belong to every sub-
\i
algebra containing D. On the other hand, the set C of all such values clearly forms a subalgebra
containing D. Hence C is the intersection of all subalgebras containing D.
3.7. Prove Theorem 3.10: Given a Boolean expression T(U), which may contain other
variables ~1, . . . , uk as well as u. Then the equation
T(U) = [T(o) A u’] V [T(l) A u]
is derivable from the axioms for Boolean algebras.

Solution:
We shall use induction on the number m of occurrences of A, v, ’ in 7. If m = 0, then T is
either u or ui (for some i). If 7 is u, then T(O) = 0 and ~(1) = 1. Thus
T(U) = U = [o AU’] V [l AU] = [T(o) AU’] V [T(l) AU]
If 7 is ui, then ~(0) = ~(1) = ui. Hence

T(U) = Ui = Ui A (U’V U) = (UiA U’) V (UiA U) = [T(o) AU’] V [T(l) AU]
Now let m > 0 and assume that the result is true for all expressions with fewer than m occur-
rences of A, V, ‘.
Case 1. T(U) = [u(u)]‘. Now, by inductive hypothesis,
u(U) = [o(o) AU’] V [o(l) A U]
T(U) = (o(U))’ = ([u(o) AU’] V [o(l) AU])’
= [o(o) AU’]’ A [u(l) A U]’ = [U(o)’ V U”] A [O(l)’ V U’]
= [T(O) v u] A [T(l) ” u’]
= [T(O) A T(I)] V [T(O) A U’] V [7(l) AU] V [U AU’]
= [T(O) A 7(l)] V [7(o) AU’] V [T(l) A U]
= [(T(O) A 7(l)) A (U V U’)] V [T(o) A U’] V [T(l) A U]
= [T(O) A ~(1) A U] V [T(O) A ~(1) A U’] V [T(o) A U’] V [T(l) A U]
= [(T(O) A ~(1) A U) V (r(1) AU)] V [(7(o) A T(1) A U’) V (T(o) AU’)]
= [r(l) AU] V [T(O) AU’]
*The intersection of a collection of sets is the set of all objects belonging to every set in the collection.
CHAP. 31 BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS 6’7
Case 2. T(U) = u(u) v p(u). Then the inductive hypothesis holds for (T and p. Hence
4-4 = h-4 ” 44
= [b(O) A 4 ” (o(l) AU,] ” [MO) A u’) ” (P(l) A 41
= [b(o) A U’) ” (~(0) AU’,] ” [b(l) A U) ” (p(l) A U,]
= [(do) ” ~(0)) AU’] V [b’(l) ” /‘(I)) A u]
= [T(O) AU’] V [7(l) AU]
Case 3. 7(u) = U(U) A p(u). This is similar to Case 2 and is left to the reader.
.., ‘, !,,’ ,’ ,iY.,xi ,>, ‘.
3.8. Prove Theorem 3.11: For any Boolean expression r(ul, . . . , ZL~),the equation
7(u,, . . . , uk) = i 5 * * * o$o [T(c+ a2, . . . , a,) A u;l A u;’ A * * ’ A ?@]

ax=0 a,=0
is derivable from the axioms for Boolean algebras (and therefore the corresponding
equation for 7% holds for any Boolean algebra 48).
Solution:
We shall use induction on k. The case k = 1 is an immediate consequence of Theorem 3.10.
Now assume that the result holds for k and we shall prove it for an expression r($, us, . . ., uk+r).
By Theorem 3.10,
4-b a*‘, %+I) = [7@,3, . . . . Uk+l)f’U;]” [4%, . . . . Uk+l)A%]

But, by inductive hypothesis,
1
T(0,U2,...,Ukfl)
= z *** & o [T(o,(Y2,...,(Yk+l)AU~A ‘*- AU:;;]
a,=0 %+l=
1
and 7(1,?&...,?&+l)
= x --* f: o [T(l, “2, . . ., “k+l) A Uza, A *” A Uz;]
a,=0 %+I=
Hence
d”1,u2, . . -,uk+l) = **’ e,$zo [7(0,(YZ,...,(Yk+l)AU~A ‘*‘Auf:+:

I( a,=0
; o[T(l,n2,...,olk+l)AU1AU~A *‘* %+I])

AUk+l
%+I=
3.9. Show that in any Boolean algebra 55 there are 22” different Boolean functions of n
variables.
Solution:
By the Disjunctive Normal Form Theorem (Theorem 3.11), the equation
1
....u.)
+-Q, = B **- a,=0
...,,,)AU;lA*-AU~]
11
is derivable. Hence the function determined by 7 depends only on the 2n values T((Y~,. . . , cy,), where
each (Y~is either 0 or 1. Each such value is 0 or 1. Hence there are 22” different Boolean functions.
P
- 3.10. If D is a finite subset of a Boolean algebra 59, show that the subalgebra C generated
by D is also finite.
Solution:
Let D have n elements. By Problem 3.6, the elements of C are the values obtained by substi-
tuting elements of D for the variables in all Boolean functions TV. Clearly, we may confine our
attention to functions 7% of at most n variables, since variables for which the same element of D is
substituted may be identified. By Problem 3.9, there are 22” such functions. Hence since each of
the n variables may be replaced by any of the elements of D, we obtain at most 22”* nn possible
elements in C.
3.11. If T and (Tare Boolean expressions such that
T(C1,. . ., c,) = 1 + a(C1,. . ., c,) = 1
for all elements cl, . . . , cn of some Boolean algebra C, then 7 4 u is derivable from the
axioms for Boolean algebras.
Solution:
Let p(U,, . . ., 24,) = T A u’. If Ur, . . ., U, are given values 0 or 1, then:
(i) if 7 takes the value 0, so does p;
(ii) if Q-takes the value 1, then, by assumption, so does 0, and therefore U’assumes the value 0,
and so does p. Hence p(u,, . . ., u,) = 0 for all values of ur, . . ., u, in the subalgebra (0, l}.
Hence by Corollary 3.12, the equation p(u,, . . ., u,) = 0 is derivable from the axioms for
Boolean algebras. (Although 0 itself is not officially a Boolean expression, one can use the
expression u1 A 24; instead of 0 so as to fit into the formulation of Corollary 3.12.) Thus
7 A U’= 0 is derivable. Hence 7 f (I is derivable (by Theorem 3.5(xii)).
3.12. (Conjunctive Normal Form.) We shall use n to indicate repeated application of A.
Thus fi ~(a) denotes a(O) A V(1). Given a Boolean expression ~(uI, . . . , u,) having its
a=0
variables among ut, . . . , u,,, show that the equation
7(u,, . . . ,u,) = h
a,=0
* * * jj, (7(a1, . . . , a,) v 24;; v * * * v 24:) (1)
I
is derivable from the axioms for Boolean algebras and therefore holds in every
Boolean algebra. Also, write equation (1) for the cases n = 1 and n = 2.
Solution:
(4u1, a**, u n))’ is a Boolean expression, and, by the Disjunctive Normal Form Theorem, the
equation 1 1
4% ....uJ= 2 .** a,=0
. . ..cu.)‘AU;‘A **’ A U?]
n
is derivable. Taking the complements of both sides of (2) and applying De Morgan’s Laws, we
obtain (I). In the case n = 1, we obtain
T(U) = (T(0) v u) A (7(l) v u’)

For n = 2, we obtain
T(U~, 242) = (T&O) V U1 V 24,) A (7(0,1) V U1 V U;)
A (7(1,0) V U; V U2) A (~(1, 1) V U; V U;)

3.13. Write the Boolean expression (x A (y’ v 2)) v x’ in both disjunctive and conjunctive
normal forms.
Solution:
Disjunctive:
(2’ A $/’ A 2’) V (X’ A y A 2’) V (Z A y’ A 2’) V (x A 2/’ A 2) V (x A y A 2’) V (x A y A 2)
Conjunctive: (X V 1/ V 2’) A (x V y’ V 2’)
Sometimes, instead of using the theorems on disjunctive and conjunctive normal forms, it is
easier to find the appropriate expression by using known laws for Boolean algebras. Thus
(X A (y’” 2)) V 2’ = (XV 2’) A ((y’” X) V 2’) = X V 2’
Then, x v z’ = (XV X’) V (y A y’) = (XV y V X’) A (5 V y’” 2’).
3.14. Given a Boolean algebra 9. (i) Show that the set of all Boolean functions T* is a
Boolean algebra 7;. (ii) Prove that 7 is isomorphic to the Boolean algebra of state-
ment bundles (cf. Example 3.6). (iii) Show that the set of all Boolean functions u*, - ’
where u is a variable, is a set of generators D of 7 (i.e. the subalgebra generated by
D is the whole algebra 7).
Solution:
(4 The operations of A, v, ’ on Boolean functions are defined in the obvious way. The zero ele-
ment is (x A x’)% and the unit element is (x v x’)s. The straightforward verification of Axioms
(l)-(9) is left to the reader.
(ii) For each Boolean function ~“8, let *(T%) be the statement bundle containing the corresponding
statement form SF(T) defined in Section 3.7. This is a well-defined function, for if 7% = 09, then, by
Corollary 3.12, 7 = o holds for all Boolean algebras, and therefore by Theorem 3.14, SF(T)
and SF(o) belong to the same statement bundle. That the mapping ‘k is one-one follows from
the “if” part of Theorem 3.14. The fact that \k preserves the Boolean operation can be
checked easily by the reader.
(iii) Every Boolean function 7% belongs to every subalgebra containing the Boolean functions us,
since 7% is obtained from the functions us in the same way that 7 is built up from the corre-
sponding variables.
3.15. (Boolean Algebra and the Algebra of Sets.) For any Boolean expression T, form the
corresponding set-theoretic expression Set (T) by replacing A, V, ’ by fl, U, -. Show ’ .L C.,
that T = c holds for all Boolean algebras if and only if Set (7) = Set (u) holds in all
fields of sets.
Solution :
Use Problem 2.16(a) and Theorem 3.14.
3.16. Prove the generalized Distributive and De Morgan’s Laws:
(U) X A (&V * . . ” Y,) = (X A 241) ” *** V (X A yn)
(b) X V (yl A *- * AY,) = (X”Yd A ... A (X”Yn)

(C) (21 V ’” V X,)’ = x; A * . . A X:,
(d) (XlA .** A 2,)’ = X; V * ** V X:,
3.17. For any Boolean algebra, prove:

(a) x = 0 @ y = (5 A y’) v (x’ A y) (Poretzky’s Law)
L (b)xvy=xvz & x’vy=x’vz + y=z
‘r
(c)xvy=o H x=0 & y=o
\ (d) XAy=l - X=1 & 1/=1
(e) (x-y) v (y - 2) = 0 f) x = y
SUBALGEBRAS
3.18. Show by an example that a subset of a Boolean algebra containing 0 and 1 and closed under
A and v need not be a subalgebra.
-\ 3.19. If A determines a subalgebra of a Boolean algebra % (i.e. A is closed under A, v, ‘) and if

b E B-A, show that the subalgebra generated by A U {b}consists of all elements of the form
(ai A b)v (a2 A b’),
where a, E A and u2 E A.
3.20. Prove that, in any Boolean algebra,

(U) X5$/’ t) xAy=o
(b)xfy c) x’vy=l
BOOLEAN EXPRESSIONS AND FUNCTIONS. NORlMAL FORMS

3.21. Simplify the following Boolean expressions.
(a) (xVY) A (xVZ) A (X’AY)
(b) [x ” (Y A (2 v x’))]’
(C) (2’ A Y)’ ” (X A Y’)
3.22. Prove that two Boolean expressions either determine the same Boolean function in all Boolean
algebras or they never determine the same Boolean function.
3.23. Prove that, for any two disjunctive (conjunctive) normal forms in n variables 7 and 0, 7 = o holds
in all Boolean algebras if and only if 7 and (r are precisely the same (i.e. the identity
1
” ’ ,i, [+I, . . ., a,) A U;’ A * * * A 2421 = 2 ’ . * ,$, [O(Crl, . . ., a,) A U;l A - . . A U>]
a,=0 a,=0
II n
holds in all Boolean algebras if and only if r((~i, . . ., a,) = O(CU~,

. . ., a,) for all (~i, , a,, chosen
from (0, 1)).
1 3.24. Let r(u) be a Boolean expression. Prove:

(U) 7(7(o)) = ~(0) A ~(1) L T(U) f ~(0) V ~(1) = +(I))
0) +I v UP) v &I A ~2) = &I) v 4~2)
3.26. Show that the dual of x 5 y is x * y.

Chapter 4
Switching Circuits
and logic Circuits
4.1 SWITCHING CIRCUITS !>.\/ :: ?,

A switch is a device which is attached to a point in an electric circuit and which may
assume either of two states, closed or open. In the closed state the switch allows current to
flow through the point, whereas in the open state no current can flow through the point. We
shall indicate a switch by means of the symbol - A\-- , where A denotes a sentence
such that the switch is closed when A is true and open when A is false. We say that two
points are connected by a switching circuit if and only if they are connected by wires (lines)
on which a finite number of switches are located.
Example 4.1.
In Fig. 4-l points z and y are connected by a switching circuit. The four switches are said to be
in parallel. Clearly, current flows between x and y if and only if A v B v C v D is true. This example
mav be generalized to the case of any finite number of switches connected in parallel.
” -
Current flows
through the circuit of Fig. 4-2 if and only if the sentence A, v A2 v * * * v A, is true.
Fig. 4-1 Fig. 4-2
Example 4.2.
In the switching circuit of Fig. 4-3 current can
flow between the points z and y if and only if A &B is
true. The two switches are said to be in series. This
case may be generalized to the case of any finite number
of switches connected in series. The condition for cur-
rent flow through the circuit of Fig. 4-4 is A, & A2 &
A,&...&A,. Fig. 4-3
Fig. 4-4
Example 4.3.
In the switching circuit of Fig. 4-5 below, current can flow if and only if (A &C) v (1A v B) is true.
71
72 SWITCHING CIRCUITS AND LOGIC CIRCUITS [CHAP. 4
Fig. 4-5
Example 4.3 shows that we may combine switches in parallel and in series in the same
circuit. Such a circuit is called a series-parallel switching circuit. More precisely, if A is
any sentence, then -AL is a series-parallel switching circuit, and if S, &, . . . , S,
are series-parallel switching circuits, we may form a new series-parallel switching circuit
by replacing any switch in S by either
Clearly, a condition for flow of current through a series-parallel switching circuit can be
written down by means of conjunctions and disjunctions, starting from the expressions
representing the closure of the individual switches. In Example 4.3, this condition was
(A&C) v (1AvB).
4.2 SIMPLIFICATION OF CIRCUITS
-ct
The condition for flow of current through the cir-
cuit of Example 4.3 is (A & C) v (1 A v B). The latter
statement form is logically equivalent to the statement
form ((A & C) v 1 A) v B, which in turn is logically
equivalent to C v 1 A v B. Hence the circuit of Fig.
4-5 may be replaced by the circuit of Fig. 4-6.
The circuit of Fig. 4-6 is clearly a simplification
of that of Fig. 4-5, since it involves fewer switches. Fig. 4-6
Example 4.4.
A condition for current flow through the circuit of Fig. 4-7 is (A &B & 1C) v ( 1C & 1A). However,
this is logically equivalent to 1 C & [(A &B) v 1 A], which in turn is logically equivalent to 1 C & (B v 1 A).
Hence an equivalent, but simpler, circuit is that of Fig. 4-8. (The two circuits are equivalent in the sense
that one allows passage of current if and only if the other does.)
Fig. 4-7 Fig. 4-8

CHAP. 41 SWITCHING CIRCUITS AND LOGIC CIRCUITS 73
Example 4.5.
A committee of three decides questions by majority vote. Each member can press a button to signify
a “Yes” vote. Let us construct a switching circuit which will pass current when and only when a majority
votes “Yes”.
Let A stand for “member 1 approves”, B for “member 2 approves”, and C for “member 3 approves”.
Then a necessary and sufficient condition for a majority vote is
(A&B)v(A&C)v (B&C)
A corresponding circuit is shown in Fig. 4-9. However, the given statement form is logically equivalent to
(A & (B v C)) v (B & C), having the simpler circuit of Fig. 4-10.
LL
-E LL
Fig. 4-9 Fig. 4-10
Example 4.6.
A light in a room is to be controlled independently by three wall switches (not to be confused with
switches of a circuit), located at the three entrances of the room. This means that flicking any one of
the wall switches changes the state of the light (on to off, and off to on). Let us design a circuit which
allows current to flow to the light under the required conditions.
Let A stand for “wall switch 1 is up”, B for “wall switch 2 is up”, and C for “wall switch 3 is up”.
In the truth table of Fig. 4-11, we wish to construct a statement form f(A, B, C) for the required switch-
ing circuit.
A f(4 B, C) A f(A B, C)
(1) 'I' T
(2) F F
(4) 'I' F
(3) F T
(6) T F
(7) F T
(5) T T
(8) F F
Fig. 4-11 Fig. 4-12
The requirement on f(A, B, C) is that its truth value should change whenever the truth value of one
of A, B, C changes. We arbitrarily assign the value T to f(A, B, C) when A, B, C are all T (the first row);
thus the light will be on when all wall switches are up. Then we proceed down the truth table, changing
the truth value of f(A, B, C) whenever the truth value of precisely one of A, B, C changes. We have indi-
cated such a procedure in Fig. 4-12 by writing to the left of each row a number showing at what step the
truth value for that row has been determined. Another way of describing the assignment of truth values
is to note that T is assigned when an odd number of statement letters have the value T. We find the
resulting statement form by the method developed in the proof of Theorem 1.8; this amounts to forming
the disjunction of the truth assignments in the rows to which a T is attached:
(A&B&C)v(lA&lB&C)v (lA&B&lC)v(ABlB&lC)
This is logically equivalent to
[A&((B&C)v(-IB&lC))] v [lA&((lB&C)v(B&lC))]
having the circuit shown in Fig. 4-13 below.

Fig. 4-13
4.3 BRIDGE CIRCUITS

Sometimes a series-parallel circuit can be replaced by an equivalent circuit which is not
a series-parallel circuit.
Example 4.7.
A series-parallel circuit corresponding to the condition [A & (B v E)]v [C& (1 B v E v D)] is given in
Fig. 4-14. This is equivalent to the circuit shown in Fig. 4-15. Clearly, the only paths through this
circuit are A & B, A &zE & D, A &E & 1 B, C &E &B, C&D, C & 1 B. Hence, a condition for flow through
thiscircuitis (A&B)v(A&E&D)v(A&E&lB)v(C&E&B)v(C&D)v(C&lB), whichislogically
equivalent to [A&(BvE)] v [C&(lBvEvD)].
Fig. 4-14 Fig. 4-15
The circuit of Fig. 4-15 is an example of a circuit which is not a series-parallel circuit.
Such circuits are called bridge circuits. In Example 4.7, the bridge circuit had fewer
switches (6) than the corresponding series-parallel circuit (7).
Another example of a bridge circuit is given in Fig. 4-16. A corresponding statement
form is (A & [D v (C&E)]) v [B & (E v (C&D))], whose series-parallel circuit is shown in
Fig. 4-17.
Fig. 4-16
Fig. 4-17
Notice that any bridge circuit determines a truth function. A statement form for this
truth function is obtained by finding all possible paths through the circuit. For example,
the bridge circuit displayed in Fig. 4-18 corresponds to the statement form
(A&B&C&D) v (A&B&lC) v (lB&C&D)
Notice that the path 1 B + C + 1 C is impossible, since it contains a formula and its negation.
Fig. 4-18
4.4 LOGIC CIRCUITS

The processing of information is one of the most important roles of the modern digital
computer. For this purpose, special devices are available.
An and-gate operates on two or more inputs AI, . . . , A, and produces their conjunction
AI&A~& . . . &A,. An and-gate is denoted @.
-Al&A,& ... &A,
Fig. 4-19
More precisely, each input Ai has the form of a physical quantity (say, voltage level), of
which we choose to distinguish two states, denoted 0 and 1. The state 1 occurs if Ai is true,
and the state 0 if Ai is false. The output of the and-gate is likewise in two possible states,
0 and 1: it is 1 if and only if A1 & A2 & . . . & A, is true, and it is 0 if and only if
A1 & AZ & . . . & A, is false. Often the state of an input or output is taken to be 1 if it is
transmitting current and 0 if not. Arithmetically, the output of an and-gate is the product
of the inputs.
Another common element of a logic circuit is an or-gate

AI, . . ., A, (n% 2), then the output is A1 v AS v . . . v A,.
0v . If the inputs are
Thus the output is 1 if and only if the output of at least one Ai is 1. Arithmetically, the
output is the maximum of the inputs.
0
An inverter 1 is a device which has one input A and
produces as its output 1A. Thus the output is 1 if the
A-1
0 - -iA
Fig. 4-21
input is 0 and the output is 0 if the input is 1.
A logic circuit is defined as a circuit constructed from various inputs by means of

and-gates, or-gates, inverters, and possibly also other devices for performing truth-
functional operations.
The actual electronic (or mechanical) devices used to construct and-gates, or-gates, and
inverters vary with the state of technology. For this reason, it is most convenient to
ignore (as far as possible) questions of hardware (diodes, transistors, vacuum tubes, etc.).
This also holds for our treatment of switching circuits. Readers interested in the physical
realization of switching and logic circuits can consult [53] and [13].
Example 4.8.
To construct a logic circuit producing the output Al e A,,notice that A, e A, is logically equivalent to
(A,&AZ) v (1 A, & 1 A,) (Fig. 4-22) as well as to (A,&A,) v l(A, v A2) (Fig. 4-23). Clearly the second
logic circuit is simpler.
Fig. 4-22
1 A,vAz
1
& 1 V
0 O- 0
t t
Fig. 4-23
Example 4.9.
Construct a logic circuit producing
(A,&-iA,)v -iA,v(Az&A3)
Fig. 4-24
Notice that, instead of a logic circuit, one could construct a series-parallel switching circuit through
which current flows if and only if (1) is true (see Fig. 4-25).
Fig. 4-25
Example 4.9 indicates that the same effect can be obtained by logic circuits as by series-
parallel switching circuits. Indeed, connection in series corresponds to an and-gate, while
connection in parallel corresponds to an or-gate.
4.5 THE BINARY NUMBER SYSTEM

We are accustomed to using the decimal number system. Thus 34,062 stands for the
number 2+6~10+0~102+4~103+3~104. In general, any positive integer can be rep-
resented in one and only one way in the form
a0 + al’ 10 + a2’ 10” + ’’’ + ak’ 1ok
where 0 g ai 6 9 for 0 6 i 6 k and ak > 0. This number is denoted akak-1’ . .a2alao in

standard decimal notation.
However, for any integer r > 1, every positive integer n can be represented uniquely in
the form
a0 + al.r + az-r2 + --- + am-F
where O’ai’r-1 for Oli’rn and a,>O. This can be proved by induction on n.
In particular, every positive integer can be represented in binary notation:
a0 + aI-2 + a2-22 + --- + am*2m
where O--‘aigl for O~i~?n and a,=l.
Example 4.10.
The number 23 (in decimal notation) has the binary representation 10111, i.e. 24 + 22 + 2 + 1. The
decimal number 101 has the binary representation 1100101, i.e. 26 + 2j + 22 i- 1.
A procedure for finding the binary representation of a number n is to find the highest
power 2” which is 4 n, subtract 2”” from n, then find the highest power 21 which is
6 n - 2”, etc.
Further examples:
Decimal Notation Binary Notation Decimal Notation I Binary Notation
1 11 1011
10 16 10000
11 35 100011
100 52 110100
101 117 1110101
110
111
1000
L
4.6 MULTIPLE OUTPUT LOGIC CIRCUITS

Occurrence of the same logic circuit as part of other logic circuits suggests the use of
logic circuits with more than one output.
Example 4.11.
Cv (A&B)
w
Fig. 4-26
Example 4.12.
Two numbers in binary notation are added in the same way as numbers in decimal notation.
Binary notation: 100101 Decimal notation: 37

10111 23
111100 so
If we just consider the addition of one digit numbers, 0 and 1, we have the following
values for the sum digit s and the carry digit c.
A B s c
1 1 0 1
-t-t0 1 1 0
1 0 1 0
0 I 0 I 0 f 0
Thus s corresponds to the exclusive-or (which we shall denote A + B), while c corresponds
to the conjunction.
If we wished to construct a separate logic circuit for s we would obtain
s=A+B _
Fig. 4-27
Similarly we can construct a iogic circuit for c:
0
A-
& c
B--------r
Fig. 4-28
However, we can combine these two circuits into a single multiple output circuit:
Ac& e =
Fig. 4-29
The circuit in Fig. 4-29 is called a haZf-adder.

If we wish to add two single-digit numbers A and Bt, while taking into account a
carry-over C from a previous addition, we obtain the table
A B C S
-- - -
1 1 1 1
0 1 1 0
1 0 1 0
0 0 1 1
1 1 0 0
0 1 0 1
1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0
Thus s corresponds to the statement form

(C& l(A+B)) v ((A+B) & 1C)
which is logically equivalent to (A + B) + C. The carry-over c corresponds to the statement

form
(A&B) v (C&(A+B))
We can use the circuit constructed for A + B in Fig. 4-27 to obtain the following diagram
corresponding to the above statement.
A’
I > I
c :
s=(A+B)+C
w
Fig. 4-30
The circuit of Fig. 4-30 is called a full adder.
*Actually, A is the proposition that the first number is 1, and B is the proposition that the second num-
ber is 1.
We can construct a circuit for adding two three-digit binary numbers AzA,Ao and
-S -5
B2BIBo. Let - FA represent a full-adder, and let - HA
-c -c
:n -II
represent a half-adder. Then the sum is represented in Fig. 4-31 by CSZSISO.
A,- t so
HA
Bo- co
u : ?? Sl
Al FA
Cl
Bl .c : b -92
‘42 FA
WC
B2
-1
Fig. 4-31
4.7 MINIMIZATION
The cost of constructing and running a switching circuit or logic circuit depends upon
the state of technology and therefore varies with time. However, at a given time, some
circuits will be less expensive than other equivalent circuits.
Example 4.13.
The circuit (Fig. 4-32) corresponding to 1A v (B&A) is more expensive than the equivalent circuit
(Fig. 4-33) corresponding to 1A v B, since the latter contains fewer occurrences of statement letters and
fewer connectives. In general, decreasing the number of connectives (i.e. gates and inverters in a logic
circuit) lowers the cost, other things being equal, and decreasing the number of occurrences of statement
letters also lowers the cost, other things being equal. These two criteria usually are not the only measures
of cost; the special hardware used for constructing circuits imposes other criteria.
4:ImY.l. ---II”:
Fig. 4-32 Fig. 4-33
The minimization problem consists of determining methods for finding a simplest (i.e.
cheapest) circuit equivalent to a given circuit (or finding aZZsimplest circuits equivalent
to a given circuit). Since all that matters about the given circuit is the truth function that
it determines, the minimization problem amounts to. finding one or all simplest circuits
defining a given truth function. In Example 4.13, the circuit of Fig. 4-33 is clearly the
simplest circuit corresponding to the truth function represented by 1 A v B. Of course,
for any given truth function, one can find a circuit representing the truth function and
then check the cost of the finite number of all simpler or equally simple equivalent circuits.
This method will yield all simplest equivalent circuits, but, for three or more variables, the
application of this method often will be so involved and long that it becomes practically
unfeasible. Therefore what we are seeking is a fast, convenient and practical way of
finding one or all simplest circuits for a given truth function.
Notice that we have not pictured inverters. This common convention stems from the
fact that the presence or absence of a negation sign often results from an arbitrary decision
as to which of two contradictory assertions is to be labeled by a letter, say A, rather than
by 1 A. Since the number of negation signs often depends upon arbitrary decisions, it is
advisable to consider negations of letters as initial inputs, on a par with letters, and not to
count the number of inverters in computing the cost of the circuit.
(2) In solving minimization problem (II) for the case of logic circuits, we must consider
arbitrary statement forms (not just dnf’s). In this case, inverters are counted in computing
the cost, since negations may be applied not only to letters but also to arbitrary statement
forms. However, if we are only interested in switching circuits, consideration is restricted
to statement forms in which negation is applied only to statement letters.
Notational In writing statement forms, it is often convenient to omit the

Convention.
conjunction sign &, and to write ii instead of 1 A.
Example 4.15.
ABCV ABC insteadof (A&lB&C) v (lA&B& 1C)
fifi~~iBf?D~kiC insteadof (lA&lB)v(lA&B&lC&D)v(lA&C)
(AvB)(AvBvC) insteadof (lAvB)&(Av 1Bv 1C)
In Example 4.15 and in the sequel, we adopt the convention of omitting the parentheses
around the disjuncts of a disjunctive normal form. Thus, we have written ABC v ABC
instead of (ABC) v (ABC), and AB v ABeD v AC instead of (A@ v @B&l) v (AC). This
alternative notation saves time and space, and is customary in work on circuits.
4.8 DON’T CARE CONDITIONS

In many problems involving design of circuits there are certain conditions which are
impossible or for which no requirement is made concerning the operation of the circuit.
Such conditions are called don’t care conditions.
Example 4.16.
The switching circuit of Fig. 4-37 has a corresponding statement form A@ v C) v A B 6. In the spe-
cial case where A is “5 is an even integer”, B is “z is a perfect square”, and C is “x is an integer divisible
by 4”, the three conditions ABC, ABC, ABC are impossible. Hence there is no danger if we build a
circuit which happens to allow current to flow if some of these impossible conditions occur. In particular,
a circuit corresponding to the statement form
A(~vC)v~~~vAB~v/i~C
will accomplish the same task as the original circuit. But this statement form turns out to be logically
equivalent to A v B, which has the much simpler circuit of Fig. 4-38. (To derive the logical equivalence,
notice that ABC v ABC is logically equivalent to AR, while A@ v C) v ABe is logically equivalent to
A(Bv Cv B6) and therefore to A. We are left with A v AB, which is logically equivalent to A v fi.)
Fig. 4-37 Fig. 4-38

Example 4.16 shows that addition of don’t care conditions sometimes allows simplifica-
tion of circuits. Later (Section 4.17), we shall learn a technique enabling us to choose
those don’t care conditions which lead to maximal simplification of the circuit.
Example 4.17.
The decimal digits 0 to 9 can be represented in binary notation as follows:
Decimal
Notation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Binary
Notation 0000 0001 0010 0011 0100 0101 0110 0111 1000 1001
c; 6 ; UiA&
Consider the sentences:

A The first (right-most) binary digit is 1
B The second binary digit is 1
C The third binary digit is 1
D The fourth binary digit is 1
-- --
Then ABCD corresponds to 0
- --
ABCD corresponds to 1
ABcD corresponds to 2
.....................
&&CD corresponds to 9
In terms of inputs A, B, C, D, let us construct a switching circuit which passes current

if and only if the number represented is 6,J, or 8,.i.e. under the condition ABC% v ABCD v
ABeD. If the inputs A, B, C, D are such that they always represent a number between 0
and 9, then we can ignore the six possibilities 1010, 1011, . . ., 1111 (i.e. the binary rep-
resentations of 10 through 15). Hence the don’t care conditions are ABED, ABED, ABCD,
ABCD, ABCD, ABCD. In particular, we can use
1 ;I’
AB@ V ABCb V ABeD v ABC? V f@CD V ABED v ABCD
‘3 qJ 43- 44 Ii 4”
(Thus we are usin; four of the six don’t care conditions.) This statement form is logically
equivalent to BC v AD. (This is left as an exercise. It can be done laboriously by a truth
table, or much more easily using well-known logical equivalences from Chapter 1.) The
circuit for BC v AD is given in Fig. 4-39.
I Fig. 4-39 Fig. 4-40
If we had not made use of the don’t care conditions, our original statement form
/
ABCb v ABCD v ABED could have been reduced to BCD v ABeD, with the costlier circuit
f
shown in Fig. 4-40.
i
4.9. MINIMAL DISJUNCTIVE NORMAL FORMS

--
Given any dnf a, say ABC v ABD v ABCD v ABCD. Let IQ = the total number of
literals (i.e. letters or negations of letters) in a, and da = the total number of disjuncts of a.
In the example above, la = 14 and da = 4.
For dnf’s Q and YP,we say that @ is simplex than ? if and only if 1~5 lQ and da 4 d,
and at least one of these inequalities is strict (<).
This definition of simpler is most suitable in the case of logic circuits. If one is inter-
ested only in switching circuits, then the size of 1~ alone would be a better measure of
simplicity.
That we do not take into account the number of negation signs stems from the fact,
already mentioned, that the number of such signs often depends only on arbitrary decisions
as to which one of a proposition and its negation is to be represented by a statement letter.
A dnf Q,is said to be a ,minimal dnf for a statement form A if and only if Q is logically
equivalent to A and no other dnf simpler than Q,is logically equivalent to A. We shall now
embark upon the task of describing various methods of finding the minimal dnf’s for a
given statement form.
We must emphasize again that we shall not distinguish between a fundamental con-
junction and any other permutation of the literals in that conjunction. Thus we shall not
distinguish between ABC, BAC, &‘A, ACE, CAB and C’BA. Likewise we shall not dis-
tinguish between a given dnf and any-- other dnf obtained by permuting the disjuncts.
Hence for our purposes, AB v ABC v ABC and ACB v BA v ACE are essentially the same.
4.10 PRIME IMPLICANTS

Let A be a statement form. A fundamental conjunction Z+is said to be a prime implicant
of A if and only if + logically implies A but A is not logically implied by any other funda-
mental conjunction included in $. This is the same as saying that $ logically implies A
while any fundamental conjunction obtained by eliminating literals from # does not logically
imply A. Clearly, a prime implicant of A is also a prime implicant of any statement form
logically equivalent to A.
Example 4.18.
Let A be AB v ABC v ABC. Then AC is a prime implicant of A. For, AC logically implies A, while
A alone does not logically imply A and C alone does not logically imply A. Other prime implicants of A are
AB and BC. (Verification of these facts is left to the reader. We have no way of knowing at this point
whether we have found all the prime implicants of A.)
Example 4.19.
Let A be (fi & (A v C)) v (I?& (A v c)). This is logically equivalent to Afi v BC v Al3 v BC. The
prime implicants turn out to be AB, BC, AB, B6, AC and AC.
The main significance of the notion of prime implicant is revealed by the following
theorem.
Theorem 4.1. Any minimal dnf @ for A is a disjunction of one or more prime implicants
of A. -*/
Proof. Let $ be a disjunct of a,. If + were not a prime implicant of A, then I/ would
include a fundamental conjunction v such that B logically implies A. If @# is formed from
@ by replacing + by LT,then clearly 0 is logically equivalent to @. (For, on the one hand, $

logically implies 0, and therefore + logically implies a#. On the other hand, u logically
implies A, which-is logically equivalent to @, and therefore @# logically implies a.) But
@# is simpler than a’, contradicting the assumption that @ is a minimal dnf. )
We shall see shortly that a minimal dnf for A need not be a disjunction of all the prime
implicants of A.
Remark: Every fundamental conjunction which logically implies a statement form A

must include a prime implicant of A. For, if the fundamental conjunction I# is not itself
a prime implicant of A, then $ must include a fundamental conjunction +I which logically
implies A. If $1 is not a prime implicant of A, then +1 must include a fundamental conjunc-
tion #z which logically implies A, etc. This procedure must eventually stop, yielding a
prime implicant of A which is included in #.
Definition. If + is a fundamental conjunction and @ is a dnf, then we say that # is

superfluous in + v @ when and only when @ is logically equivalent to # v a.
If (Yis a literal, $ is a fundamental conjunction, and 9 is a dnf, then we say that CYis
superfluous in a$ v Q when and only when # v 9 is logically equivalent to a$ v a.
Remarks: (1) + is superfluous in + v @ if and only if $ logically implies 4,. (2) a is

superfluous in N+v @ if and only if $ logically implies (Yv @.
We shall say that a dnf is h-redundant if and only if it contains no superfluous disjuncts
or literals.
Of course, we may obtain an irredundant equivalent of a given statement form by

eliminating superfluous conjunctions and literals one by one. Clearly, an irredundant dnf
is a disjunction of prime implicants, for, if one of its disjuncts were not a prime implicant,
some literal of that disjunct would be superfluous (cf. Problem 4.10). In addition, any
minimal dnf must be irredundant (for, elimination of superfluous disjuncts or literals
would yield a simpler dnf).
Example 4.20.
Start with the dnf AB v ABC v ABC v Be.
(1) The first occurrence of B is superfluous. (For, AC implies B v AB v ABC v Be.) Thus we obtain
ABvACvAfXvBc.
(2) AB is superfluous. (For, AB implies AC v ABC v BC.) We now have AC v ABC v B6.
(3) A is superfluous. (For, BC implies AC v A v Be.) This leaves us with AC v l?C v BE, which turns
out to be irredundant. (The reader can verify this without difficulty.)
Notice that AB is a prime implicant of the original dnf but that AB does not occur in the irredundant
dnf that we have constructed. Thus an irredundant dnf logically equivalent to a given statement form A
of A.
need not containallof theprime implicants
Example 4.21.
It is easy to verify that AB v AB v Bc v BC is irredundant. However, it is not a minimal dnf,
since AB v AC v B6 is a simpler logically equivalent dnf. Thus an irredundantdnf need not be a
minimal dnf. Hence the very simple procedure of reducing to an irredundant dnf does not solve the
problem of finding minimal dnf’s.
4.11 THE QUINE-MCCLUSKEY METHOD FOR FINDING

ALL PRIME IMPLICANTS
If A is a statement form and $I and & are fundamental conjunctions, then we say that
$I is a completion of & relative to A if and only if +I includes & and the statement letters
in $I are precisely the letters occurring in A.
Example 4.22.
Let A be ABC v AD -v _-
AB, and let #1 be AC. Then there are four completions of + relative to A,
namely: ABED, ABcfi, ABCD, Al?cD.
Lemma 4.2. Let, + be a full dnf (i.e. a dnf in which the letters contained in any one dis-
junct are precisely the letters in any other disjunct; see page 14). Let +
be a fundamental conjunction all of whose letters are in @. Then +
logically implies @ if and only if all completions of + relative to 4, are
disjuncts of ai.
Proof. (i) Assume 46logically implies a’, but some completion $Jof + relative to @ is not
a disjunct of a. Take the truth assignment corresponding to $ (i.e. letters unnegated in #
are T, while letters negated in + are F). Since $ is a completion of 4, the assignment makes
+ T, and, therefore, it also makes @ T. But all disjuncts of a, being different from # in at
least one letter, must be F. Hence @ would also be F, not T.
(ii) Assume all completions of + relative to @ are disjuncts of @. Take any truth assign-
ment making + T. We must prove that @ also is T. The truth assignment corresponds to
some completion + of + relative to 4, (a letter appears unnegated in $ if it is T and negated
if it is F). Then $ is a disjunct of @. But, since # is T, so is @. )
Lemma 4.3. If A is not a tautology, no prime implicant + of A contains any letters not
in A.
Proof. Assume some letter, say B, is in + but not in A. Let x be the fundamental
conjunction obtained from + by removing the literal containing B. (Notice that + is neither
B nor Z?. For, take a truth assignment making A false and choose the value of B so that
+ is T. Then + does not logically imply A.) x also logically implies @. (For, given any truth
assignment making x T, extend it by making B true or false according as B or B occurs as
a conjunct of 4. Then (b is T and therefore A is also T.) But this contradicts the assumption
that + is a prime implicant of A. )
Theorem 4.4. Let Q be a non-tautologous full dnf, and let + be some fundamental con-
junction. Then + is a prime implicant of @ if and only if
(i) all letters of (p are also in Q’;
(ii) all completions of + relative to Q are disjuncts of a’, but no other
fundamental conjunction included in + has this property.
Proof. Direct consequence of Lemmas 4.2-4.3. )
The Quine-McCluskey Method for Finding All Prime Implicants of a Non-Tautologous

Full Dnf a: Let Q be +I v - . . v &.
(1) List +1, . . . , tik.
(2) If two fundamental conjunctions + and x in the list are the same except that + con-
tains a certain letter unnegated while x contains the same letter negated, add to the list
the fundamental conjunction obtained by eliminating from + the letter in which + differs
from X. Place check marks next to 4 and x.
(3) Repeat the process indicated in (2) until it can no longer be applied. Fundamental
conjunctions which already have been checked can be used again in applications of (2).
The unchecked fundamental conjunctions in the resulting list are the prime implicants
of a. (This assertion will be justified after consideration of a few examples.)
Example 4.23.
Let + be Al36 v ABC v ABC v AL% v ABC. Start with
ABC
Al%
ABC
ABC
ABC
Application of (2) yields
Notice that ABC and ABC yield BC; ABC and ABC yield AC, ABC and ABC yield AB. Now (2) is no
longer applicable. Hence the prime implicants are ABC, BC, AC, AB.
Example 4.24.
Let @ be
ABCD v AB6D v AB6D v A&D v ABCb v ABcii v ABCD v A%D
(1) List ABCD
ABCD
A&D
Al%D
ABED
1 ABCD
Notice that the disjuncts are listed in groups: first, those with no negations, then those with one
negation, etc. Since process (2) is applicable only to a pair of fundamental conjunctions which differ
by one in the number of negations, in seeking to apply (2) we need only compare fundamental con-
junctions with those in the next group.
(2) Application of process (2) yields ABCD p’ ABD
ABCD / 1 ACD
1 A&D / ACD
ABi‘
Al?CD /
ABC‘6 / 1 AL?D
i dBCb / BCD
/iBcD / BCD
tlB6ij / ABiS
Further application of (2) produces
ABCD 4 ABD 4 AD
ABi‘D / i ACD d
-iA&D 1/ A6D r/
ABCD 4 ABC
AS&j r/ i ABD I/
1 ABCb r/
BCD
A&D / BCb
i /iBcD J I ABb
Process (2) is no longer applicable. Hence the prime implicants are ABC, k?D, Bc’b,ABb, AD.
Justifica.tion of the &u&e-McCluskey Method: All fundamental conjunctions in the list

logically imply a. (It is only necessary to observe that application of process (2) to funda-
mental conjunctions which logically imply 4i yields a fundamental conjunction which also
logically implies Q.) Every prime implicant + of @ will appear unchecked. (For, by Theorem
4.4, all completions of $ will be disjuncts in a. Hence $ will eventually appear in the list
after suitable applications of process (2) to these completions eliminate all the letters not
in $. # itself will never be checked, since if it were it would not be a prime implicant of a.)
On the other hand, no fundamental disjunction $ which is not a prime implicant will remain
unchecked. (For, + must include a fundamental conjunction + which is a prime implicant
of a,. By Theorem 4.4, all completions of + originally appear in the list. By suitable
applications of process (2) to these completions, we obtain a fundamental disjunction x
differing from # in precisely one letter. Then application of process (2) to JIand x imposes
a check on $.)
Limitation of the &wine-McCluskey Method: One must start with a full dnf. If we
are given a dnf which is not full, we must expand it into a full dnf. This tedious and long
process can be avoided by another procedure which we shall study later.
4.12 PRIME IMPLICANT TABLES

Once we have obtained all prime implicants of a given statement form a’, we must find
out which disjunctions of prime implicants are minimal dnf’s.
Theorem 4.5. Let @ be a non-tautologous full dnf, and let Q be a dnf. If * is a minimal
dnf for @, then each disjunct of Q includes a disjunct of Q.
Proof. Assume not. Let + be a disjunct of cpwhich does not include any disjunct of +.
Hence each disjunct of 9 differs in at least one literal from + But then the assignment
of truth values making + T makes * F, and therefore makes + F. But + is a disjunct of Qk;
so Q must be T, which is a contradiction. )
Our overall strategy can now be made clear. We choose a disjunction @ of prime impli-
cants so that every disjunct of the full dnf 9 includes a disjunct of q. (Clearly, + is logically
equivalent to Q. Since q is a disjunction of prime implicants of a, * logically implies a.
On the other hand, since each disjunct of Q includes a disjunct of ‘k-, @ logically implies 9.)
Among all such q’s we find the minimal ones. We shall indicate techniques for narrowing
this choice to a relatively small number of *‘s.
Construct a matrix, one row for each prime implicant of 4, and one column for each
disjunct of a. Place a cross (x) at the intersection of a row corresponding to a prime
implicant + and a column corresponding to a disjunct I/ of + such that I+includes + This
matrix is called the prime implicant table for @.
Example 4.25.
Let + be ABC v dBc v ABC v ABC. Using the Quine-McCluskey method, we obtain
ABC i
AC
A& /
AB
ABC 4
Bi‘
ABC /
Thus the prime implicants are AC, AB, BC, and the prime implicant table is shown in Fig. 4-41.
~5 i A~ A~, A~ ~:i
Fig. 4-41
We shall now describe various operations performed on prime implicant tables in order
to obtain minimal dnf’s.
Core Operation. Assume there is a disjunct I/ of Q such that the column under + con-
tains a single cross. Let + be the prime implicant corresponding to this cross. + belongs
to what we shall call the core of @. By Theorem 4.5, + must be a disjunct of every minimal
dnf for @. We eliminate the row corresponding to + as well as all columns containing a
cross in the row corresponding to 4. (Since + must be a disjunct of every minimal dnf, the
condition of Theorem 4.5 is met for the disjuncts heading any such column.)
Example 4.25 (continued).

In Fig. 4-41, the columns under ABC and ABe have a single cross each. Hence JC and B6 belong to
the core. But all the columns contain a cross in the rows corresponding to AC and BC. Hence AC v BC
is the unique minimal dnf for 9.
Example 4.26.
Let 9 be
ABCD v ABC'D v AB~'D v A&D v ABCD v ABC~ v ABED v ABED
Find the prime implicants:
ABCD / ABD d BD
ABCD 4 ACD
AkD / BCD r/
i ABCD /
Hence the prime implicants are BD, ACD, ABC, ABC',ACD.

The prime implicant table is
ABCD ABED ABC'6 ABCD ABCD tlBCD ABCD ABCD
BD X X X
ACD
ABC
ABC
ACD
We draw circles around crosses which are the only ones in a given column. In this case there are such
crosses in the columns under ABc‘?i, ABCD,ABCB,AB6D. Hence ABC, ACD, ABC and dcD are in the
core. We draw a square around each cross in any row in which there is an encircled cross. In Example
4.26 we then have a square or circle in every column. Thus every disjunct of Q includes a prime implicant
in the core. Hence ABC v ACD v ABC v AcD is the unique minimal dnf for a.
The results of Examples 4.25 and 4.26 are exceptional. Sometimes a single application
of the core operation is not sufficient. Wider coverage is afforded by adding the following
two operations.
Dominant Column Operation. Jf a column /3 has a cross in every row in which a column
a has a cross, then we can eliminate column ,!A (To satisfy the condition of Theorem 4.5,
we have to use a prime implicant included in the fundamental conjunction heading column
Then by assumption the same prime implicant is included in the fundamental conjunc-
ken heading column p.)
Dominated Row Operation. If the row corresponding to a prime implicant #1 has a
cross in every column in which the row corresponding to a prime implicant q2 has a cross,
and if the number of literals of $1 is smaller than that of q2, then we eliminate the row
corresponding to +2. (F or, if a minimal dnf had $2 as a disjunct, replacing qz by #1 would
lower the cost, contradicting the assumption that $z is minimal.)
Example 4.27.
Let @ be
- -- _- --
Abed V A&D V ABcb V ABED V h%?D V ABED V A&B V Abed V &CD V &CD V ABED
First we obtain the prime implicants:
ABCD / ACD 4 AC
ABC r/ BC
A&D 1/
ABCb d BCD / AB
ABCD 4 LIB
Al% v'
Ai?D I/
BCD /
ACiS r/
1 A&b
ABCD
/iBCD 4/
1/ ABC 4
_ _-
ABCD v' 1 ABD I/
/iBED 4
_- --
ABCD 4
- _-
BCD
- --
ACD
--- ---
Thus the prime implicants are BCD, ACD, AC, BC, AB, AB. The prime implicant table is
- -- - - --
ABCD ABCD ABCB ABCD ABCii ABCb A&% ABCD ABCD AB6D ABCD
- --
BCD X X
- --
ACD X X
AC X X X X
BC X X X X
AB El El El 0
AB El 0 El 0
The columns under ABED and ABED have unique crosses, which we circle. Thus AB and AB belong to
the core. Put a square around each cross in the rows belonging to AB and AB. Hence all the columns
containing a circle or square can be eliminated. The new table is
The columns under ABCD and ABCB have crosses in the same row. Hence by a dominant column opera-
tion we may eliminate either column, say, the one under ABCD. This leaves us with the new table:
_- --
ABCD ABCD
(1) - --
BCD X
- --
(2) ACD X
(3) AC X
(4) t BC X
Fig. 4-42
None of our operations are applicable to this table. However, notice that in order that each column
include some disjunct of the required minimal dnf, we must have ((1) or (2)) and ((3) or (4))t, i.e.
((1) v (2)) & ((3) v (4)). This is logically equivalent to
((1) & (3)) v ((1) & (4)) v ((2) CfL

(3)) v ((2) & (4))
Thus there are four different ways of choosing the rest of the prime implicants, and we obtain the
four dnf’s:
- --
Ai?vi%BvBCDvAC
- --
ABvfiBvBCDvBC
- --
ABvABvACDvAc
- --
ABvtlBvACDvBc
These are the only possibilities for minimal dnf’s. Since they all have the same cost, all four are mini-
mal dnf’s.
We shall call the method we have used for handling the table of Fig. 4-42 the Booleanmethod.
Example 4.28.
Let + be
ABCD v ABED v ABCD v ABCB v ABCD
- -- _ - --
v ABM v ABCD v ABCD ~ABcbv ABCD
tBy (l), we mean that row (1) appears as a disjunct in the required minimal dnf, by (2) we mean that
row (2) appears as a disjunct, etc.
We obtain the prime implicants:
, ABCD 4 [ABD 4 BD
(ABCD r/ I.BCD 4
- --
ABCD r/
i ABCD 1/
- - --
ABCD I/
- --
Thus the prime implicants are ABC, ACD, BCD, ABb, BD, AC. The prime implicant table is
- -- - - --
ABcD A&D ABCD ABCI~ ABCD /iBCfi /iBCD ABCD t3&% ABCD
ABC X X
ACD X X
- --
BCD X X
AED X X
BD 0 El El 0X
AC El 0 0 El
Circle the crosses which are unique in their columns. Hence BD and A6 are in the core. Place squares
around all crosses in the rows of BD and AC. We then eliminate the rows of BD and AC, and all columns
containing squares or circles. The new table is
-_ --
1 /iBCir ABCD ABCD
I
(1) tlBC X
(2) ACB I X X
(3) - --
BCD X
(4) ABii X X
Fig. 4-43
Now we can apply the Boolean method used in Example 4.27. We obtain 1(l) v (2)] 8~[(2) v (4)] & [(3) v (4)1,
which is equivalent to
[Cl) 65(2) & (3)] v [Cl) & (2) & (4)] v [Cl) & (4)] v [Cl) & (3) & (4)] v [(2) & (3)] v [(2) & (4)] v [(2) & (3) & (4)l
But, taking into account the fact that, when (2) is used, (1) is not required, and that, when (4) is used,
(3) is not required, we obtain
((2) & (3)) v ((2) & (4)) v ((1) & (4))
Thus there are three possibilities for minimal dnf’s:

- --
BDvAcv/iCijvBCD
BDvACvACijv~@ij
BDvACvABCvAB6
Since the costs are the same, all three are (the only) minimal dnf’s for a.
Instead of the Boolean method, we may use the so-called branching method for handling the table of
Fig. 4-43. We take a column with a minimal number of crosses. In our example, there are two crosses in
each column; so we may choose any column, say the one under .dBCD. To ensure that ABCD includes
a prime implicant of the sought-for dnf’s, we may use either ABC or ACD. Hence we obtain two tables
(in general, if there are n crosses in the column, we would obtain n tables) as follows: in the left-hand table
(Fig. 4-44) we assume that ABC is taken as a disjunct and we eliminate the row containing ABC as well
as every column containing a cross in that row. For the right-hand table (Fig. 4-45), we do the same
with ACD.
Fig. 4-44 Fig. 4-45
In the left-hand table, we can again apply the Boolean method or branching, but in this simple case it is
obvious
- _- that only the choice of ABi? will yield minimal cost. In the right-hand table, we can choose either
BCD or AED. Thus we have the following possibilities:
From the left-hand table, BD v A6 v ABC v ABD.
From the right-hand table, BD v At? v ACD v Bf?D and BD v AC’ v ACD v ~@fi.
This is identical with the result of the Boolean method.
4.13 MINIMIZING WITH DON’T CARE CONDITIONS

Let us assume that we must find a minimal dnf for a statement form @, assuming that
the additional fundamental conjunctions +1, . . . , +k are don’t care conditions. Then we can
adapt the method used in the preceding section in the following manner. Find all prime
implicants of Q v q1 v . . f v tik. However, in constructing the prime implicant table, use
columns only for the disjuncts of CD,not for ql, . . . , +k (since we are concerned only that
each disjunct of @ include some prime implicant of the required minimal dnf’s).
Example 4.29.
Let @ be
A&D V ABCb V &?CD V &cb V A&L%
-- --
Let the don’t care conditions be: ABCD, ABED, ABeD, dBcD, ABCD. By the standard procedure (left
as
- -an
--exercise for the reader), we fmd that the prime implicants of 9 v ABCD v ABED v A%D v ABcD v
ABCD are: BD, AC, ABC, ACE, ficb, Al?b.
The prime implicant table is
1 Al?cD Al?cb ABCD ABCb /i&B
BD X X
AC X X
ABC X X
ACB X X
- --
BCD X
Am
Now AC has crosses wherever BCB- has,

-- and A6 has fewer literals than J?CD. Hence by a dominant row
operation we eliminate the row of BCD, obtaining
ABCD AiX?D ABCD tlBCfi ABCD

BD X X
AC El 0
ABC X X
ACD X X
ABD X
Now the column of ABED has a unique cross. Hence we place A6 into what we call the secondary core.
(AC must be a disjunct of every minimal dnf.) Then by the core operation we drop the row of AC,
together with the columns under ABED and ABED:
Now we can apply either the Boolean method or the branching method. However, it is clear that the first
and third rows yield the only minimal dnf. Hence the unique minimal dnf is AC v BD v ACD.
4.14 THE CONSENSUS METHOD FOR FINDING PRIME IMPLICANTS

Given two fundamental conjunctions q1 and #2. If there is precisely one letter p which
occurs negated in one of $1 and #z and unnegated in the other, then the fundamental con-
junction obtained from $1+2by deleting p and p and omitting repetitions of any other literals
is called the consensus of #, and s#~.
Example 4.30.
(i) The consensus of A% and ABD is ACD.
(ii) The consensus of AB and Ak'D is BCD.
(iii) There is no consensus of ABC and ABD.
(iv) The consensus of A and AB is B.
(v) The consensus of A and AB is B.
Theorem 4.6. The consensus + of $1 and q2 logically implies #1 v #2.

Proof. Consider any truth assignment making + true. Let P be the letter occurring
negated in $I and unnegated in g2. If p is T, then qz is T. If p is F, then +I is T. In either
case, I/I~v I& is T. )
Corollary 4.7. If + is the consensus of $1 and $z, then +I v qz is logically equivalent to

$1 v #z ” +
Consider the following two operations transforming a dnf into a logically equivalent dnf.
(i) Eliminate any disjunct which includes another.
(ii) Add as a disjunct the consensus of two disjuncts, if that consensus neither is identical
with nor includes some disjunct of the given dnf.
Given a dnf a. (If we are given an arbitrary statement form, first transform it into a
logically equivalent dnf.) The consensus method consists of applying operations (i) and (ii)
until these operations are no longer applicable. The result turns out to be the disjunction
of all prime implicants of @.
Example 4.31.
Let + be ABi’ v Al?Cb v Al? v ABC v AfiCD.
By (i), ABC v AB v ABC v Al?cD (ABCD includes A@.
By (ii), ABC v Afi v ABe v L@~D v A6 (Consensus of ABC and A@.
By (i), Al? v ABC v ABcD v A6 (ABC includes AC).
By (ii), AR v ABC v ABC?D v A6 v BED (Consensus of AB and .dBcD).
By (i), AI? v BBC v A6 v BcD (.dBcD includes BED).
By (ii), AB v ABC v A6 v B6D v Bf? (Consensus of ABC and AC).
By (i), Al? v AC v fi6D v B(? (ABC includes Bc).
By (ii), AB v A6 v B6’D v Bc v CD (Consensus of BED and B6).
By (i), Ai? v AC v B(?v CD (i?cDincludes CD).
Thus, the prime implicants are Al!?,
AC, B6, CD.
Example 4.32.
Let 9 be AB v ABCb v ABC v E?D.
By (ii), AB v ABCn v ABC v BD v AC6 (Consensus of AB and A&%).
By (i), AB v ABC v BD v ACD (ABCD includes ACfi).
By (ii), AB v ABC v BD v ACD v Be (Consensus of AB and ABC).
By (i), AB v BD v AC?? v BE (ABC includes BE).
By (ii), AB v l?D v ACir v Bc v AD (Consensus of AB and ED).
By (ii), AB v l?D v ACfi v BC v AD v ABC (Consensus of BD and ACB).
By (ii), AB v ED v AC6 v BC v AD v ABC v AC (Consensus of AB and ABC).
By (i), AB v ED v Bc v AD v AC (ABC includes AC; ACfi includes AC).
By (ii), AB v ED v SC v AD v AC v CD (Consensus of BD and B6).
Hence the prime implicants are AB, BD, B6, AD, AC, CD.
Example 4.33.
Let + be ABCD v ABED v ABED v ABC v A6i.
By (i), ABCD v ABED v ABC v A6b (ABED includes A6n).
By (ii), ABCD v ABED v ABC v At% v t?cD (Consensus of ABcD and .&?Z‘).
By (i), ABCD v Al?C v A6D v AcD (ABED includes AED).
By (ii), ABCD v ABC v ACn v AC?D v Bcb (Consensus of ABe and ACB).
- --
Hence the prime implicants are ABCD, ABC, Acfi,AcD, BCD.
Justification of the Consensus Method.

(1) The process must come to an end. Since there are only a finite number of dnf’s using
the letters of the given statement form a, we must show that there can be no cycles in the
application of (i) and (ii). Once we drop a fundamental conjunction #I by (i), then (b can
never reappear by virtue of (ii). For, in all future step& there will always be a fundamental
conjunction which is included in 9. Hence if there were a cycle, it would consist solely of
applications of (ii). But (ii) increases the number of disjuncts.
(2) Every prime implicant + of @ occurs as a disjunct in the dnf -P remaining at the end
of the process. Assume the contrary. Hence there must be a fundamental conjunction 6’
which has the maximum number of literals among all fundamental disjunctions T such
that: (a) T includes 4; (b) T includes no disjunct of -P; (c) the letters of T occur in @.
Notice that 4 is such a fundamental conjunction 7. Clearly, by (a), 19logically implies a.
96 SWITCHING CIRCUITS AND LOGIC CIRCUITS /CHAP. 4
Also, B cannot contain all the letters of a,. (Otherwise, by (b), B would logically imply the
negation of each disjunct of +, and therefore would logically imply la. But only con-
tradictions logically imply both Q,and 1 Q, and no fundamental conjunction is a contradic-
tion.) Let A be a letter of Q not in 0. By the maximality of 8, A0 and A0 must lack one of
the properties (a)-(c). The only one they can lack is (6). Hence there are disjuncts +I and
qz of * such that AH includes #1 and &I includes q2. By property (b) of 0, A must be a literal
of I/~and A must be a literal of qz. Since A0 includes I+~and A6’includes q2, q1 and $, do not
have any other literals which are negations of each other. Then the consensus p of I#~and
qz is included in 8, and therefore, by (b), includes no disjunct of Q. Hence an application of
(ii) can be made to #I and g2, contradicting the assumption that the process has ended.
(3) Every disjunct + of the dnf !P remaining at the end of the process must be a prime
implicant of a. Otherwise + would include some prime implicant #. By (2), # would be a
disjunct of the final dnf, and operation (i) would still be applicable.
4.15 FINDING MINIMAL DNF’s BY THE CONSENSUS METHOD

If we have obtained all the prime implicants of a statement form GJby the consensus
method, the problem remains to find the minimal dnf’s. Of course, we could construct the
full dnf for 4, and then apply the methods already described. However, constructing the
full dnf for + sometimes would involve a long and tedious process, and it would be conven-
ient to have ways of producing minimal dnf’s without going through that process. One
such method is to eliminate superfluous literals and disjuncts from the disjunction of the
prime implicants, obtaining irredundant dnf’s. Then one can compare the irredundant
dnf’s and pick out the minima1 ones.?
Example 4.34.
We have already found (Example 4.33) that -the
_- dnf ABCD v ABC6 v ABcD v ~~~ v Acid has as
its prime implicants ABCD, ABC, Acfi, ACD, BCD. Now we shall eliminate superfluous disjuncts from
1
ABCD v /ifiGv AC0 v ACD v k%n
To determine whether a given disjunct $ is superfluous in a dnf + v * we check whether * is logically

equivalent to $ v *. This holds if and only if + logically implies *. But the latter holds if and only if
the result is a tautology whenever, for each literal p in +, we replace p in * by T and the negation of p
by F. Hence we construct the following table.
- --
1 ABCD ABC ACb ACD BCD
ABCD F F F F
ABC F F F D
ACb F F F E
ACD F B F F
- --
BCD F A A A
In the row corresponding to a fundamental conjunction @ we calculate what each of the other disjuncts
must be when @ is T. Then we check to see whether the disjunction - -- of the results in that row is a
tautology. In the table above, this holds only in the last row. Hence BCD is the only superfluous disjunct.
All the other disjuncts must occur in every minimal dnf. Thus we are reduced to
ABCD v Ah? v AC’LSv ACD
fThe method we shall outline is due to M. J. Ghazala [26].

To eliminate superfluous literals, remember that a literal p is superfluous in p$ v * if and only if $ logi-
cally implies p v *. A quick check shows that none of the literals is superfluous. Hence we have a unique
irredundant dnf, which must be the only minimal dnf.
Example 4.35.
Consider the statement form @:
BCVBCVBDVCDVAD
Since the consensus method yields no additional disjuncts, this is already the disjunction of all the prime
implicants of +. For finding superfluous disjuncts, we construct a table as in the preceding example.
$1 $2 $3 (h4 $5
I l&Y B6 BD CD AD
$1 Bc F F D AD
+, BE F D F AD
$3 BD F c C A superfluous
$4 CD fi F B A superfluous
c5 AD EC SC B C
Since the disjunctions of the terms in the first, second and fifth rows (respectively) are not tautologies,
BC, B6 and AD are not superfluous and occur in all minimal dnf’s for +. Let ei mean that ci occurs as
a disjunct in a given dnf for a. Hence from the third row, if 5 then 0204, for, if +3 does not occur in the
given dnf for +, then both +s and @4 must occur. (Otherwise, when @s is T, then + would not necessarily
be T, contradicting the fact that +3 logically implies a,) Thus u3 v (u2g4) is true. Similarly, from the
fourth row, ch v (01u3) is true. Hence we must have
which is equivalent to ul”204u5 v 01u2u3(r5
Hence the two irredundant dnf’s are BC v BE v CD v AD and l?C v B6 v BD v AD. Since these are
of equal cost, they are both minimal dnf’s. Notice that in this example we could have guessed this
immediately from the third and fourth rows.
Example 4.36.
Let the prime implicants of a statement form be BE, CDls?, ACD, ACE, ABD, ABE, BCD, BCE.
(Observe that the consensus method is no longer applicable to the disjunction + of these fundamental con-
junctions, and therefore the latter are all the prime implicants of a.)
$1 +2 $3 @4 $5 cs $7 $8
bE CD‘?3 ACD ACE ABD ABE BCD BCE
DE F F AC F AB F BC
CDB F A F AB F B F
tlCD F E E F F B BE superfluous
ACE b F D F F BD B superfluous
Al?D F CE F F E c CE
ABE D F F F D CD C superfluous
BCD F B A AE A AE E superfluous
BCE D F AD A AD A D superfluous
Rows 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 show that ACD, ACE, ABE, BCD, kE are superfluous. Thus (r,, 02, a5 are true. From
the third row, n3 v 02~4 is true. From the fourth row, ~4 v c103 is true. From the sixth row, 06 v u1u5
is true. From the seventh row,
07 v up8 v (r.p,p6 v (1p30fj v 02r74c75
v (1305
is true. This has been obtained by finding those subsets of the entries in the seventh row, the disjunction
of which is a tautology and such that no proper subset of this subset has the same property. This process
can be carried out by constructing a table for the entries in the seventh row similar to the one constructed
above. From the eighth row,
OS ” Ol”7 v cT~c73(15
v (rl(ryJf,” (r1aqag” 0406
is true. Hence we have
o1q&3 ” v4)(u4 ” v3)b% ” UlC5)
(07 v QzC,s
” ozt,4mG
” rza3g,j” (7204m5
” a305)(08” 0lc7 ” 0103m5 ” 0l(r3(Tf,
” UlU405 ” 04d
This is equivalent to (71~2U3U5 ” ~1(72~4”5
(When multiplying out, we see that these are two of the disjuncts in the expansion, and, since all the other
disjuncts include one of these, all other disjuncts may be dropped.)
Thus the irredundant dnf’s are
DE v CD.@ v ACD v .&?b and bE v CDI? v ACE v Al?D

Notice that none of the literals is superfluous. Since the costs of these dnf’s are equal, both are
minimal dnf’s.
4.16 KARNAUGH MAPS

There is a pictorial method for obtaining minimal dnf’s which is convenient for problems
involving at most six statement letters.?
Let us start with the case of two statement letters.

In this case t.he Karnaugh map is based upon Fig. 4-46. B
Each square represents the fundamental conjunction
whose conjuncts are the literals standing at the head of
the row and column determining the square. To rep- I3
resent a full dnf @ we place a check in each square cor- El
responding to a disjunct of a. Fig. 4-46
Example 4.37.
AB v AB is represented in the Karnaugh map of Fig. 4-47 and Ai? v AB v AB in the Karnaugh
map of Fig. 4-48.
Fig. 4-47 Fig. 4-46

A A
By adjacent squares we mean squares which have a
side. in common. Clearly, a single square represents a
B
fundamental conjunction consisting of two literals, while
two adjacent squares differ in one statement letter and
therefore represent a single literal. Thus in Fig. 4-4’7 B
we have AB v AB, which is logically equivalent to B. In
Fig. 4-49 we notice two pairs of checked adjacent Fig. 4-49
tSee Karnaugh [42]. Another pictorial method, somewhat less graphic than Karnaugh’s, has been given
by Veitch [93].
squares. We place loops around the checks in each pair. Then the corresponding dnf is
logically equivalent to B v A. (B corresponds to the horizontal loop, and A to the vertical
loop.) Clearly, B v A is minimal.
Now let us turn to the case of three statement letters (Fig. 4-50). Each square rep-
resents the conjunction of the fundamental conjunctions heading the column and row
intersecting in that square.
AB AB /iB AB
c
EIE
Fig. 4-50
Example 4.38.
ABC v AL?C v ABC is represented in Fig. 4-51.
AB Al? /iB /iB
C 4 d
6 I/
E
Fig. 4-51
Example 4.39.
ABC v ABC v ABC v ABC v ABC is represented in Fig. 4-52.
Fig. 4-52
In Fig. 4-50, by adjacent squares we mean squares which differ in precisely one literal.
Thus two squares which have a side in common are adjacent. (Observe that we have used
the labeling AB, Al?, AB, AB so that as we move from one square to an adjoining one,
only one literal changes.) In addition, in the first row the left-most square ABC is adjacent
to the right-most square ABC; and in the second row, ABC
is adjacent to ABC. This amounts to an identification of
the left-most vertical line with the right-most vertical line.
C
Pictorially we can imagine the left-most vertical line glued
to the right-most vertical line so as to form a cylinder
c
(Fig. 4-53).
On the cylinder, adjacent squares are adjacent in the

usual geometric sense. Fig. 4-53
In Fig. 4-50, a single square represents a fundamental conjunction of three literals,

while two adjacent squares differ in one literal and therefore represent a fundamental
conjunction of two literals.
Example 4.40.
Fig. 4-54 shows ABC v ABC which is logically equivalent to At?.
AB AB iiB /iB
C 4
c 4
i
Fig. 4-54
Example 4.41.
ABC v ABC is represented in Fig. 4-55 and is logically equivalent to BC.
AB Al? /iB /iB
Fig. 4-55
Furthermore, four squares forming a square array or arranged in one row represent
a single literal.
Example 4.42.
Fig. 4-56
Fig. 4-56 exhibits ABC v ABC v ABe v ABC?, which is logically equivalent to B.
Example 4.43.
Fig. 4-57
In Fig. 4-57 we see ABC v ABC v ABC v ABC, which is logically equivalent to A.
Example 4.44.
Fig. 4-58
In Fig. 4-58 we have ABC v AL%? v ABZ‘ v ABi‘, which is logically equivalent to c.
Example 4.45.
c 4 4
c 4 4
n
Fig. 4-59
Fig. 4-59 represents ABC v ABC v ABC v ABC, which is logically equivalent to B.
Notice that if we picture Fig. 4-59 on a cylinder, the four checks form a square array.
The technique for minimization is straightforward. We draw loops around single

checks, or pairs of adjacent checks, or groups of four checks (forming a square array or
arranged along a row), in such a way that every check belongs to at least one loop. We try
to make maximal use of groups of four checks or two checks so as to minimize the number
of disjuncts and literals.
Example 4.46.
AB AB /iB AB
Fig. 4-60
The Karnaugh map of Fig. 4-60 represents ABC v ABC v ABe v A&?. The unique minimal dnf is
AB v AC v A&?. AB corresponds to the vertical loop, and AC to the horizontal loop.
Example 4.47.
AB AB /iB /iB
Fig. 4-61
Fig. 4-61 represents ABC v ABC v ABC v ABC v ABe. There is a unique minimal dnf: B v AC.
B corresponds to the four checks ABC, ABC, ABC, ABC’, while AC corresponds to the horizontal loop
covering ABC and ABC.
Example 4.48.
Fig. 4-62
The unique minimal dnf is A v 6.
Example 4.49.
Fig. 4-63
In this case, Al?6 can be combined with either ABC or Al%?. Hence we have twb minimal dnf’s:
ACVA~VAB, ACv~~v~~
Let us consider now Karnaugh maps for four statement letters (Fig. 4-64).
AB AB /iI? /iB
Fig. 4-64
Again, adjacent squares are those which differ in exactly one literal. In particular, ABCD
and ABED are adjacent, as are ABED and ABeD. This amounts to identifying the left-
most and right-most vertical lines, and identifying the lowest and highest horizontal lines.
Pictorially we can imagine that we have glued together the left-most and right-most vertical
lines, and the lowest and highest horizontal lines, to form a doughnut-shaped surface
(called a torus). On this doughnut, adjacent squares are adjacent in the usual geometric
sense.
A single square represents a fundamental conjunction of four literals. A pair of

adjacent squares represents a fundamental conjunction of three literals. Four squares, in
a square array or along a single row or along a single column, represent a fundamental
conjunction of two literals. Finally, eight squares arranged in two adjacent columns or in
two adjacent rows represent a single literal.
I
CHAP. 41
Example 4.50.
SWITCHING
CD
CIRCUITS
AB AB
AND LOGIC CIRCUITS
/iE /iB
103
Fig. 4-65
The Karnaugh map in Fig. 4-65 represents AB.
Example 4.51.
CD
Fig. 4-66
Fig. 4-66 represents AD.
Example 4.52.
AB AB AB AB
Fig. 4-67
Fig. 4-6’7 is the Karnaugh map for BD.
Example 4.53.
AB AB AR /iB
Fig. 4-68
Fig. 4-68 represents B.
Example 4.54.
CD
Cb
CD
CD
Fig. 4-69
Fig. 4-69 represents D.
Minimization techniques for four statement letters are similar to those for three.
Example 4.55.
Fig. 4-70
The unique minimal dnf is AD v Bd. Observe that the four squares in the column under AB are
not joined by a loop, since the corresponding fundamental conjunction AB would be superfluous.
Example 4.56.
AB AB AB /iB
Fig. 4-71
The check in ABCD cannot be combined with any other. Hence ABCD must be in any minimal dnf.
The check in ABC% can be combined only with the check in A&D. Hence BCD must be a disjunct of
any minimal dnf. Similarly, the check in ABEiS can be combined only with the check in ABeD. Hence
Ai% is a disjunct of any minimal dnf. Now the checks in Ah% and Ah?ii already have been covered.
Thus the unique minimal dnf is
ABCD vBc6vAC.D
Examples 4.55-4.56 illustrate the method to be used. For each checked square, deter-
mine whether there is a unique largest combination of checked squares containing it. If
so, put a loop around that combination. To avoid superfluous disjuncts, first handle each
checked square whose unique largest combination consists only of itself; then, among the
remaining uncovered checks, handle those whose unique largest combination consists of two
checks; among the still uncovered checks, handle those whose unique largest combination
consists of four checks, etc. For any remaining checked square, determine all the possible
largest combinations containing them, and, among the corresponding dnf’s,t find the minimal
ones.
Example 4.57
AB Al? /iB iiB
CD
CD
Cb
CD
L
Fig. 4-72
Considering ABCD, we see that ABC must be a disjunct (covering ABCD and ABC@. Looking at
ABCD, we note that ABC must be a disjunct (covering A&D and A&B). None of the other three checks
belongs to a unique largest combination. The only uncovered check is A&D, which can be combined
either with ABCD or with A&%. Hence we obtain two minimal dnf’s:
ABC v ABC v Ad and ABC v ABC v i?CD
In the case of five statement letters, we can use a three-dimensional Karnaugh map
(Fig. 4-73).
Fig. 4-73
tSome choices among the remaining combinations may render superfluous some of the disjuncts already
obtained (cf. Problem 4.22).
The usual definition of adjacent squares implies that corresponding squares in the two
planes (e.g. Al?CiSE and ABCDE) are adjacent. Combinations of sixteen squares are pos-
sible and yield a fundamental conjunction consisting of a single literal. Combinations of
eight squares yield fundamental conjunctions of two literals, etc.
For six statement letters one could use four planes, but in that case, and even more so
for larger numbers of statement letters, the geometric picture often is too complex to permit
easy construction of minimal dnf’s.
4.17 KARNAUGH MAPS WITH DON’T CARE CONDITIONS

If we are given a full dnf a, together with various don’t care conditions, we construct a
Karnaugh map by placing checks in the squares corresponding to the disjuncts of ip and
crosses in the squares corresponding to the don’t care conditions. In constructing minimal
dnf’s, we are free to use any of the crosses which allow us to form larger combinations of
squares.
Example 4.58.
Let + be
ABCD v A&D v AfiCfi v ABCfi v ABeD
--- _-_-
and assume that ABCD, ABED, ABED, ABCD, ABCD are don’t care conditions. The Karnaugh map is
shown in Fig. 4-74.
--
tlB
Fig. 4-74
First we handle the checked squares which belong to unique largest combinations (possibly including
crosses). Thus ABCD belongs to a unique largest combination: {ABCfi, ABCD}. Hence ABC must be a
disjunct of all minimal dnf’s. Likewise, A&b belongs to a unique largest combination (the second column),
and therefore AB must be a disjunct of all minimal dnf’s. The other checks do not belong to unique largest
combinations. The only check still not included in a loop is ABCD. For the latter, there are two possible
combinations of four squares. Hence we may use either AD or BD. Thus there are two minimal dnf’s:
ABC v AL? v AD and ABC v AB v BD.
Example 4.59.
Let 9 be _- --
ABcDE V Aide V A&BE V A&bE V ABCDE V A&DE
---- -----
v ABcDk V ABCDB V ABCDE V ABCDE V A&DE
Let the don’t care conditions be
ABCDE, A&%E, ABCDE, ABCfil?, /ikijl?, ABCDE
The Karnaugh map is shown in Fig. 4-75 below.

CHAP. 4j SWITCHING CIRCUITS AND LOGIC CIRCUITS
Fig. 4-75
We seek the checks belonging to unique largest combinations. First, ABCDE belongs to such a com-
bination (the four corners of both p-lanes). Hence BD is a disjunct of all minimal dnf’s. We get the
same result from the checks for ABCDE, ABCDE, ABCDE, ABEDI?. The checks
--- in the middle squares
_-__
of both planes
- - - belong
- - - to
- _ a- unique 8-square combination: (A&TEE, A&DE, ABCDE, ABCDE, A&%jE,
ABCnE, ABCDE, ARCDE}, yielding the disjunct fib. The only check still unaccounted for is A&DE.
This belongs to two Z-square combinations. Hence we must have either ABCE or ACDE. Thus there are
two minimal dnf’s:
BDvB~v/i&E
4.18 MINIMAL DNF’s OR CNF’s

Given a statement form cp,we can obtain the minimal dnf’s for Q and we also can obtain
the minimal dnf’s for 1 a. But the minimal dnf’s for la yield minimal cnf’s (conjunctive
normal forms) for a.
Example 4.60.
Recall that a cnf is a conjunction of one or more disjunctions of one or more literals. The cnf
(A vi?v C) & (A v B) & (Bv i‘)

has as its negation
ABCVABVBC
Thus by comparing the costs of the minimal dnf’s and minimal cnf’s for +, we can obtain those state-
ment forms which are minimal among all dnf’s or cnf’s for +.
Example 4.61.
Let + be - --
ABC~"ABCDVAB~DVABCDV ABCDvAlkfivABCB
If we examine the Karnaugh map for + (Fig. 4-76, below), we find that there are three minimal dnf’s:
ABD v ACiiv ACDVBCD
ABDvAC'~~AB?~VABC
ABD v AC~~ABC~BC~~
CD
CD
Cb
CD
Fig. 4-76
On the other hand, la has the Karnaugh map (Fig. 4-77) obtained by putting checks in the empty squares
and erasing the checks already present in Fig. 4-76.
AB Al?
CD
Fig. 4-77
From Fig. 4-77, we see that the minimal dnf’s for 1Q are
AD v ABC v ABd v /i%
AD v BCD v ABd v Al%?

- --
AD v BCij v ACD v ABC
AD v BCij v /icfi v i?cD
Thus the minimal cnf’s for + are
Since these are cheaper than the minimal dnf’s for +, these are minimal among all dnf’s or cnf’s for a.
The procedure in the above example for finding the minimal statement forms among all
dnf’s or cnf’s for @ does not provide a general method for finding minimal statement forms
for @ (i.e. minimal series-parallel switching circuits, or minimal logic circuits). For example,
(A&B) v (C&(DvE)) is minimal, but it is neither a dnf nor a cnf.
Final Remarks: (1) We have indicated methods for finding minimal dnf’s (or minimal
dnf’s or cnf’s). This constitutes a solution of Problem (I) on page 81, although possibly
not the best solution (cf. Remark (2)). No reasonably good general solutions for Problems
(II) or (III), page 81, are known. (2) The methods we have given for finding minimal
dnf’s require us to find all prime implicants. (This is not true of Karnaugh maps, but these
are useful only for statement forms involving at most five or six statement letters.) How-
ever, there are certain cases in which the number of prime implicants is so large that our
methods are not practical3 There is need then for a method for finding minimal dnf’s which
does not use the set of all prime implicants, but no general method of this kind is available.
Solved Problems
SWITCHING CIRCUITS. SIMPLIFICATION

4.1. Replace the series-parallel circuit of Fig. 4-78 by a simpler bridge circuit.
Fig. 4-78
Solution:
Consider the bridge circuit shown in Fig. 4-79. The paths through this circuit are A &B t2 C,
A &D &E, A &D & c, A &B & 6, A &B &E. Hence a condition for passage of current is
(A&B&C)v (A&D&E)v (A&D&I’)v (/i&fiB&)v (A&B&E)
which is logically equivalent to [A &B & C] v [(E v c) & ((A &D) v (A &&)I. But this is a con-
dition for passage of current through the given circuit.
Fig. 4-79
tFridsha1 [24] states that, for nine statement letters, the full dnf whose fundamental conjunctions are
those with 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, or 8 negated literals has 1698 prime implicants. The full dnf whose fundamental
conjunctions are those with 0, 1, 5, 6, or 7 negated literals has 765 prime implicants, and its negation has
the same number of prime implicants.
4.2. A committee consists of the chairman, president, secretary, and treasurer. A motion
passes if and only if it receives a majority vote or the vote of the chairman plus one
other member. Each member presses a button to indicate approval of a motion.
Design a switching circuit controlled by the buttons which passes current if and only
if a motion is approved.
Solution:
Let C, P, S, T stand for “The chairman approves”, “The president approves”, etc. Then the
condition for approval is
[C&(PvSv T)] v (P&S&T)
which has the corresponding series-parallel circuit shown in Fig. 4-80.
LOGIC CIRCUITS. BINARY NUMBER SYSTEM

4.3. Let a non-negative integer less than 10 be given by its binary representation u3u~u1u0.
(For example, if the integer is 3, then a3 = a2 = 0 and aI = uo = 1; while if the
integer is 9, then a3 = a0 = 1 and a2 = al = 0.) If Ai is the statement that ui is 1,
construct a logic circuit corresponding to the condition that the given integer is prime.
Solution:
The prime integers are
Decimal Notation 2 3 5 7
Binary Notation 0010 0011 0101 0111
A corresponding statement form is
-IA,& [(-iA,&A,& -IA,) v (lA,&A,&Ao) v (A,& -iAl&Ao)v (A,&A,&Ao)]
which is logically equivalent to
TA,& ([A,&(A,vA,)] v [TA,&A,& lA2j)
A corresponding logic circuit is
-43
eO 1’
4.4. Justify the following algorithm for translating a number x from decimal into binary
notation.
Use two columns. Place x at the top of the left column 43
(in our example, x = 43). Divide x by 2, putting the re- 21
mainder TO in the right hand column and the quotient qo in 10
the left hand column below the given number. Repeat this 5
process with qo, etc. Stop when we get a quotient 0. The 2
resulting binary number is to be found by reading the right 1
hand column from the bottom up (in our example, 101011). 0
Solution:
x = 2q, + 9.0, To = Oorl
Qo = 2% + r19 r1 = Oorl
..................... .............
9k-2 = 2qk--1 + ,)-k--l, rk-l = Oorl
qk-I = 2.1 + Tk, ?.k = Oorl

1 = 2*0+1
Then
x = 2(2q, + 9.1) + 9-o = 4q, i- 2r, + 9-0 = 4(2q, + T‘J + 2?-, + 7-o
= 8q, + 4r, + 2?-1 + 9-0 = 16q, + 8r, + 43 + 2r, + v. = *. *

Z.Z 2k+l + 2krk + * f . + 23r, + 227, + 27-i + To
Thus the binary expansion of x is lrkrk- i. * .rzrlro.
4.5. Construct a logic circuit for adding 1 to a four-digit binary number U~UZCLNXO.
Solution :
Let A, stand for “q is 1”. Let b,bsb,b,bo be the result of adding 1, and let Bi stand for
“bi is 1”. Then
B, = 1 A, and the carry Co = A,;
B1=(A1&lCo)v(lA1&C,)=A1+Co andthecarry C1=AI&Co=A,&Ao;
B,=(A,&lC1)v(lA,&C1)=A2-tC1 andthecarry C2=A2&C1=A2&A1&Ao;
B3=(A3&lC2)v(lA3&C2)=A3+CC2 andthecarry CS=A3&C2=A3&A2&A1&Ao=Bq.
If we use @ to designate the circuit of Fig. 4-27, we obtain
Ao
A2
4.6. Describe a method for reducing the operation of subtraction of binary numbers to
the use of addition only.
Solution:
Assume given two numbers x and y in binary notation. Let us assume that they are at most
n-digit numbers.
Example: x = 11010
y = 1101 (n=5)
Change all digits of y to their opposites; in our example, 10010. Add this new number z to 2.
11010
+ 10010
101100
Add 1 to the result: 101101. Omit the leading 1: 1101. This is x-y.
What we did in obtaining x from y was to form (2n-l)--y=lll...l-y. Addingthistox

nd$its
yielded x + [(2” - 1) - y] = (x - y) + (271- 1). Addition of 1 then gave (x-y) + 2n, and omission
of the leading 1 finally reduced to x - y.
Another example: x = 101111 and y = 110100. Then x = 001011.
101111
+ 001011
111010
1
111011. Answer: 11011.
The purpose of reducing subtraction to other operations (addition, adding 1, etc.) is to facilitate
its implementation by logic circuits.
What does the process described above yield when y is greater than x?
4.7. Assume that a number between 0 and 9 is given as a four-digit binary number.
Employing the notation of Example 4.17, make use of don’t care conditions in order
to construct a simple switching circuit (or logic circuit) for the condition that the
given number is a prime.
Solution:
The condition for being a prime is
/iB~~vAB~6vA~C~vABC~
The don’t care conditions correspond to the numbers 10 through 15:
AseD, AB&, A&D, ABCD, ABcD, ABCD
Of these six conditions, we select three and obtain the dnf:
ABeD V A&D V A&D V AB& V ABED V ABeD V &CD
(A method for choosing the proper don’t care conditions is presented in Section 4.17.) This state-
ment form is logically equivalent to Bc v AB (exercise for the reader) and hence to B(C'v A),
which has the switching circuit
MINIMAL DISJUNCTIVE NORMAL FORMS. PRIME IMPLICANTS

4.8. To test whether a fundamental conjunction + is superfluous in I# v a, show that it
suffices to replace all occurrences in @ of unnegated letters of $I by T and occurrences
of negated letters of $ by F, and then observe whether the result is a tautology.
Example: To see whether AC is superfluous in AB v AC v BC, we obtain TB v
TF v BT, i.e. B v B, which is a tautology. (Note that any T in a fundamental con-
junction may be dropped, and any fundamental conjunction containing an F as a
conjunct also may be omitted.)
Solution:
We must see whether + logically implies @, i.e. whenever $ is T, then + also must be T.
When \Lis T, all the unnegated letters of 1~ are T and all the negated letters are F. When this
truth assignment is made in +, we observe whether the result is always T, i.e. whether the result
is a tautology.
4.9. If I+ is a fundamental conjunction and Q is a literal, to test whether (Yis superfluous

in a$ v @‘,show that it suffices to replace all occurrences in (Yv Q of unnegated letters
of # by T and occurrences of negated letters by F, and then to observe whether the
result is a tautology,
Example: Is B superfluous in AB v AR v ABC? We obtain TB v I? v FBC, i.e.
B v B, which is a tautology.
Solution:
We must see whether $ logically implies DIv a; i.e. whenever $ is T, then 01v rP also must be T.
But, if $ is T, the unnegated letters of $ are T and the negated ones are F. Then the result of
the indicated substitution must always be T, i.e. must be a tautology,
4.10. Prove that if one of the disjuncts of a dnf @ is not a prime implicant of @, then a
literal of that disjunct is superfluous. Hence an irredundant dnf @ must be a dis-
junction of prime implicants of @.
Solution:
Let o be + v q, where + is not a prime implicant of +. This means that there is a fundamental
conjunction e which is a proper part of + and such that B logically implies #V k. Let (Ybe any
literal of $ which is not a literal of 8, and let 3 be obtained from $ by deleting LY. Thus 6 is
included in 3. Hence 5 logically implies 8, and therefore $ logically implies $ v *. From this we
may conclude that 3 logically implies O!v q. Thus (Y is superfluous in CY$V9, i.e. in a.
4.11. Find an irredundant dnf logically equivalent to

ABC v ACD v Al?D v ABC v BCD
Solution:
(1) ACD is superfluous (since B v 2 is a tautology). This leaves
ABC v ABD v ABe v BCD
(2) B is superfluous (since BCv B v Be is a tautology). This leaves

ABC v AD v /iBd v BCD
(3) B6D is superfluous (since A v A is a tautology). This leaves

ABC v AD v ABC
which is irredundant.
4.12. Find all prime implicants of ((A v B) -+ C) v AI?c by the Quine-McCluskey method.
Solution:
First we must expand the given statement form into a full dnf:
~(Av~)vCv~~~
ABVCVABC
ABCv/iBCvABCv A~Cv~~Cv/il?~
Then
ABC r/ BC I/ C
ABC r/ 1 AC 4 A
{ ABC r/ AB 4
ABe r/ AC 4
{ ABC c' 1 Bc 4
ABC 4 AC /
AB r/
Thus there are two prime implicants: C, A.
4.13. Find all minimal dnf’s logically equivalent to

ABcDE V ABCDE V A&DE V ABCDE V &?Ci?E V ABCbE
- - --
vA~CmvABC~~v~~~~E V ABcDE
using the Quine-McCluskey method and prime implicant tables.
Solution:
First we find the prime implicants.
ABCDE 1/ ABDE
ABdDE I/ { ACDE
-I AkDE J Ak?3
Al?CfjE r/ L?CaE
ABC~E / { /iCaE
1 ABCijl? ACDB
ABBE
ABCDB 4
i A&DE /
/iL%?DE J
- - --
ABCDE r/
The prime implicants are ABCDE, ABDE, ACDE, Al?CE, ACbE, l?CDE, ACDl?, ABnE. The
prime implicant table is
-- --
ABCDEABC~EAB~DEABCDEABC~EABC~EAB~D~'AB~D~ABCDE~BC~~E
ABCijI?
0 X
ABDE
El 0 X
ACDE X X
A&E X X
Hence the core consists of ABCBL?, ABDE, ACBE,A(?Dl?, ABBE. Thus we obtain the new table:
xgy-y
It is clear from this table that a minimal dnf is obtained only if we choose ABCE (since all other
ways of covering both columns would require two disjuncts, each having four literals). Hence there
is a unique minimal dnf:
ABC~l?vABDEv/iC~Ev ticDz??vi@iiEvABCE
4.14. Find the minimal dnf’s for the dnf

ABCDE v ABeDE v ABCDE v ABeDE v /iBcDE
v ABcDE v ABCDE v ABciX
with the don’t care conditions Ak’DE, ABCDE, ABCfiE, ABf?Dl?.
Solution:
First find the prime implicants:
ABCDE { ABDE / ADE
ABCDE 4 ACDE /
A&DE / I ABCD
I ABCDE /
ACDE /
Al%?DE / BCDE
ABCDE i ABDE r/
r Al?CijE / i A%'E
ti&%E / ABED
ABCbI? / i i?cDE
r ABCD@ 4 ABCD
ABCDE / ACDB
1 Ah.?Dl.? 4 i ACDE
Therefore the prime implicants are ABCD, BCDE, A&YE, ABcD, &DE, A&B, ACDl?, AeDl?,
ADE. We obtain the prime implicant table:
ABCDE ABCDE ABCDI~ ABCDE ABCDE ABCDE ABCDB ABcI%
ABCD El 0
X
X
BCDE X
A&E
ABC0 X X
&DE X
Aim X X
ACDB X
A6DB X
ADE R El 0
Hence ABCD and ADE belong to the core. We obtain the following new table. (Notice that row
Al?CE has been dropped, since it is empty.)
ABCDE .&?CbE ABCDB ABCbB
BCDE X
ABCD X X
&%E X
ABCD x X
ACDB X
ACDB X
We may now use the Boolean or branching method. However, in this case, it is obvious that the
minimal dnf is obtained using ABf.?D and ABC?i (since any other way of covering all the columns
would require more than two disjuncts). Hence there is a unique minimal dnf:
ABcD V ADE V ABeD V A&D
4.15. Find all solutions of Problem 4.7, using the Quine-McCluskey method and a prime
implicant table.
Solution:
The given dnf is ABcfiv ABen v ABCBv ABCb. The don’t care conditions are: ABcD,
ABED, L@CD, AL%D, ABCD, ABCD. First we find the primeimplicants.
'AB
AC
BD
i CD
BC
Hence the prime implicants are AB, AC, BD, CD, B6; and we obtain the following prime
implicant table
1 ABcb ABCb A&b ABCb
AB X X
AC X
Thus SC is in the core. We then obtain the table
AB X
AC X
Thus we may choose either AB or AC, and there are two minimal dnf’s: Bcv AB (which factors
into B(c v A)), and B6 v AC. Notice that in Problem 4.7 we obtained only SC v AB. However,
the other answer SC v AC cannot be factored, and therefore the first answer gives us the simplest
statement form (although both give equally simple dnf’s).
4.16. Using the Quine-McCluskey method and prime implicant tables, find all minimal dnf’s
for
ABCDEG~ABCDEG~AB~DEG~ABCDEG~ABCDEG~ABCDEG
” ABmEG V ABCDEG V ABcDEG V ABCDEG V ABCDEG V AB(%
with the don’t care conditions

ABZ'DEG, ABCDEG, ABcDEG, ABcDEG,
ABCDEC, ABCDEG, ABCDl?G, h?CDl?G

Solution:
The prime implicants turn out to be
B~DG, CDEG, CDL?G, BD~G, ADI~G, BCDE', ACEG, Ab~i2, CDBG, ACD
(Verification is left as an exercise for the reader.) We then draw up the prime implicant Table I.
Table I
ABCDEG Al%DEG ABCDBG ABCDEG ABt?DI?G Al%DEG
BCDG X X
CDEG X X
CD&G X X
BDl?G X X X
ADl?G X X X
BeDI? X
A6EG
AbEG
CD8G
A6D X X X X
1 ABCDEG Al?CDEG AB(?ijEc ---

ABCDEG ABcD@ ABCDBG
B6DG
CDEG
CDI?G
BD.!?G
AD.??G
B6DE X
ACEG X
AB,Ee X
6DBG X
AZ‘D
No applications of the core operation are possible. However, we can eliminate the following col-
umns by dominant column operations:
ABCDEG (since it dominates ABCDEG),
ABCDBG (since it dominates ABCDI?G),
ABcDl?G (sinceitdominates ABi'Dl?G),
ABCDEC (since it dominates Ah?DEG),

- --
AB(?DEf? (since it dominates ABCDEC),
ABcD&c (since it dominates ABcDI?f?).
Thus, we obtain Table II.
Table II
ABCDEG ABCDEG ABeDBG AhCDEG ---

ABCDEG ABCDEG
B6DG
CDEG X
CDz!?G X
BD.@G X
ADl?G X
BCDI?
ACEi.? X
ADEt?
CD@
ACD X X X
In Table II we can apply the dominated row operation to eliminate the rows of CDEG and
ADl?G (both dominated by ACD). We can also drop the first row, since it is empty. Thus we
obtain Table III.
Table III
Ak?DEG ABCDBG Ai%DI?G ABCDEG A&%EG ABCDIZ
X X
In Table III, the first and third columns have unique entries. Hence ACD belongs to the secondary
core. We then can drop the last row and the first, third and fourth coIumns, obtaining Table IV.
Table IV
_ --
I ABCDBG ABCDEG ABCDIX
CD.?.?G X
BDl?G X
BeDI? X
ACEG X
ADEt?
CDS X
Clearly, application of the Boolean method to Table IV yields eight different minimal dnf’s
(by choosing either the first or second row, either the third or sixth row, and either the fourth or
fifth row):
A6D v CDEG v AcEt? v BCDI?
ACD v CDl.?G v Af?Ec v CD&??
ACD v CDl?G v AbEG v BCDB
At?D v CD.@G v AiSEG v CDl?G
ACD v BD.lm?Gv AeEG v BcD.?I?
ACD v BDI?G v A6EG v CDl?G
ACD v BDl?G v AbEG v BeDI?
AicD v BD.l?G v ADEt? v CD,@
Observe that ACD must be present because it is in the secondary core,
4.17. Using the consensus method, find all minimal dnf’s for the dnf of Problem 4.11.
Solution:
(1) ABC v ACD v Ai?D v ABC v BED
(2) ABC v ACD v ABD v ABC v BCD v ABD (Consensus of ARC and BGDJ
(3) ABC v ACD v ABD v ABC v Bt?D v ABD \/ ACD (Consensus of Ai?D and B6D)
(4) ABC v ACD v ABD v ABC v BCD v ABD v A6D v AD (Consensus of ACD and ACD)
(5) ABC v ABC v Bi?D v AD (since ACD, Al?D, ABD, A6D all include AD)
Operations (i) and (ii), page 94, are no longer applicable. Hence ABC, ABC, BCD, AD are the
prime implicants.
Let us draw the following table:

91 @z $3 e4
I ABC ABC BCD AD
ABC F F D
ABC F D F
B6D F A A superfluous
AD BC F Be
From the third row, (rav o~(T~,and we obtain u1u2(u3v u2u4)oq, which is equivalent to ~i~so4. Hence
the only irredundant dnf is
ABC v ABC v AD
Therefore this is the only minimal dnf.

4.18. Apply the consensus method to find all minimal dnf’s for
ABC v Bf) v ACD v /i&F?
Solution:
(1) ABC v Bb v Ac?D v Ai%
(2) ABC v Bfi v ACD v Ah? v ABD (Consensus of ABC and ACD)
(3) ABC v Bb v ACD v 2% v ABD v ABC

(Consensus of BB and ACD)
- --
(4) ABC v Bb v ACD v ib?C v ABD v ABC v ACD (Consensus of Bb and A&)
- --
(5) ABC v Bb v ACD v A&? v ABD v ABC v ACD v AB (Consensus of SD and ABD)
(6) Bd v AZ’D v ABC v Aefi v AB (ABC, ABD, ABC all include AB)
(7) Bb v ACD v ABZ‘ v AC6 v AB v &?b (Consensus of ACD and AL%?)
Operations (i) and (ii), page 94, are no longer applicable. Hence the prime implicants are Bd,
AeD, Al%, /iC6, AB, h?D.
Now we construct the following table:
91 $2 $3 +4 $5 $6
Bd ACD ABC ACD

--- AB ED
Bb F F AC A F
ACD F F F B B superfluous
/ifIG F F is F D superfluous
- --
ACD B F B F F superfluous
AB b CD F F F
BED F A A F F superfluous
Hence we have the result

ulb2 v “5~6h3 v ~4u6)b4 v ‘71”3b5(c6 v u2O3)
01C73”506 v OlC2U3O5 v (r10405(r6
Therefore there are three irredundant dnf’s:
BbviiBCvABvh?D
Bbv/ii?CvABvAcD
BdvACfivABvB~D
Since they are of equal cost, all three are minimal dnf’s.
KARNAUGH MAPS
4.19. Using a Karnaugh map, find all minimal dnf’s for
--- ----
Al?CD v ABCb v ABCb v /iI%% v ABCD v ABCD v tlBeb v ABeD
Solution:
Draw the Karnaugh map:
CD
Handling the checks whose unique largest combination consists of two squares, we obtain the
four loops indicated in the diagram. Since all checks are covered, the unique minimal dnf is
Al%2 v ACB v A&? v /icij
Notice that, although each of the four checks in the middle belongs to a unique largest combination
of four squares, that combination is not required, since all the checks in it already have been
covered.
4.20. Use a Karnaugh map to find all minimal dnf’s for the dnf of Problem 4.18:
ABCvBbvA~Dv/il?C
Solution:
To use a Karnaugh map we need not expand the given dnf into a full dnf. It suffices to place
a check in every square containing one of the disjuncts. (For example, ABC generates the two
checks in ABCD and ABCB; Bd generates four checks, etc.)
There are no isolated checks and no checks with a unique largest 2-square combination.
However, there are checks belonging to unique largest I-square combinations. The first column
gives AB, and the other I-square combination yields Bb. The remaining three checks produce
three minimal dnf’s:
- - --
AB v Bb v ACD v ABC (A&?D combines with ABED, and ABCD with ABeD)
- - --
AB v Bb v BCD v ABC (ABeD combines with ABcD, and ABCD with ABeD)
-- --
AB v Bd v 860 v A6n (A%D combines with A&?D, and ABCD with ABeD)
This verifies the solution of Problem 4.18.
4.21. By means of a Karnaugh map, find all minimal dnf’s for

- --
ABcDE v A%DE V ABCDE V ABCDE V ABCDE
- - --
v ABcDE V ABCDE V ..dBCDE V ABCDE V ABCDE
- - -- -
vAB~bli?vABCDEvAB~Dl?v/il?~DI?
Solution:
The Karnaugh map is
AB Ai? tll? /iB
There is one isolated check, yielding the disjunct ABCfiE. There is one check (ABCDE)
belonging -to_- a unique _ 2-square
- -- combination, which yields the disjunct ACDE. There are two
- -
checks (ABCDE and ABCDE) belonging to a unique g-square combination, which yields BC.
Another check (dBCD8) belongs to a unique &square combination, yielding BD. Since all the
checks are covered, we have obtained a unique minimal dnf:
hK%E v ACDE V B6 V &I
4.22. Use a Karnaugh map to find all minimal dnf’s for

- --
/~~CDEV~BCDEVA~C~EVL@C~EVABCDE
- - --_--
VAB~EVABCDEVABC~VL~BCDEVABCDE
AB /il? /iB
- --There are four checks belonging

-- --- to unique
__ _- largest e-square combinations (ABCDE with
ABCDE,-Al?Cfif? with _-
ABCDE,
-- ABCDE with ABCDE, and ABCDI? with ABCDE), yielding the dis-
juncts ABCE, ABCD, ABCD, and ABCD. There is a unique largest I-square combination containing
ABCDE, and this yields the disjunct BbE. Now there is one check still uncovered: A&DE.
There are apparently two equally simple ways of covering this check:
(1) A&DE with ABCDE, yielding the disjunct ACDE.
(2) ABCDE with h?CnE, yielding the disjunct A&YE.
- - --
However, notice that in case (2) the 4-square combination (AfiCfiE, AI%~E, _Af@fiE, ABCDE)
has been covered by four different S-square combinations, and the disjunct BDE becomes super-
fluous. Thus there is actually only one minimal dnf:
-- --
ABCEV ABCB v ABCD v ABCD v ALWE

- --
Aik%v~~C~vABCD
assuming Al?CD,ABCD,ABCD,ABCD,ABCD,ABCD, ABcD,AB(?D are don’t care

conditions.
Solution :
We use checks for the disjuncts of the given dnf, and crosses for the don’t care conditions.
AB Al? AB /iB
CD
- --
The check in ABCD is in a unique largest I-square combination, yielding the disjunct AR. The
only uncovered check is in A&%. This belongs to two 4-square combinations. Hence there are
two minimal dnf’s: AB v AC and AB v BC.
4.24. Use a Karnaugh map to find all minimal dnf’s for
---- -----
with the don’tcareconditions Ai?CDE,ABCDE, ABcDZ?, Abed,!?, ABCDE, ABE.
Solution:
AB
There is an isolated check at ABCDE. Hence this must be a disjunct. The checks at ABCDE
and .dBcDl? belong to unique largest 2-square combinations, producing the disjuncts A%E and
ABC%. The check in ABCDE belongs to a unique largest 4-square combination, yielding the dis-
junct BD8. The only uncovered check is ~~CD~. This belongs to two e-square combinations,
yielding either .@CE or A&D. Hence there are two minimal dnf’s:
ABCDE v Ah?E v ABC’ v l?ds?? v A&TX?
ABCDE v A%E v /iBCB v iio‘x?? v A&D
4.25. Find all minimal dnf’s or cnf’s for
Solution:
Draw the following Karnaugh map.
AB AB AB AB
The checks in Ah?D-, .dBcD and A&D belong to unique largest a-square combinations, yield-
ing the disjuncts ABC’, ABC and ABC. The remaining check in AfX?D belongs to three 2-square
combinations. Hence there are three minimal dnf’s:
Aih? v /iBC v ABC v lb?D
A% v ABC v /i&Y v /iBD
A&? v tlB6 v ABC v &?D
To find the minimal cnf’s, we draw the Karnaugh map for the negation:
AB AB Ai?
-
CD
I
4
-
CD d
cii 4
-
CD 4
-
ABeD belongs to a unique largest 4-square combination (the first column), yielding the disjunct AB.
A&D belongs to a unique largest 4-square combination, producing the disjunct AC, and ABCD - - --
belongs to a unique largest I-square combination, yielding BC. The only uncovered check is ABCD,
which is isolated. Hence the unique minimal dnf for the negation is
- - --
ABvACvBCvABCD
Therefore the unique minimal cnf is

(/iv~)(/iv~)(~v~)(AvBvCvD)
This is simpler than any of the minimal dnf’s. Hence it is the minimal dnf or cnf.
4.26. Find all minimal dnf’s or cnf’s for

- - _- - - -- -
ACDEvABC~EvAI?C~~vABCDvABCDE V AB&IE
with the don’t care conditions ACD,??, ABCI?, BCDE, AB6E, A%'ijl?, Al?Cl?,
ABCDE.
Solution:
First we draw the Karnaugh map.
The check in ABCDE is in a unique largest 2-square combination, yielding the disjunct ABcD.
The check in Al?cDE is in a unique largest I-square combination, yielding the disjunct B&J.
The other checks are covered by two 8-square combinations, yielding Bb and AC. Hence there is
a unique minimal dnf:
ABCD v 1303 v BB v Ac
The Karnaugh map for the negation is:

AB Afi /iB AB
The check in .@CDE belongs to a unique largest 2-square combination, producing the dis-
junct %DE. The check in ABCDl? belongs to a unique largest 4-square combination, yielding ABd.
The remaining checks are covered by two unique largest %square combinations, generating AC and
AC. Hence there is a unique minimal dnf for the negation:
BI~DEVAB~VACVAC
and therefore a unique minimal cnf for the given dnf:
? (BvCv~v~)(Av~vD)(~vC)(Av6) (2)
This cnf and the minimal dnf (I) are of equal cost. Hence there are two minimal dnf’s or cnf’s:
(I) and (2).
SWITCHING CIRCUITS. SIMPLIFICATION. BRIDGE CIRCUITS
4.27. Write down a statement form representing a condition for flow of current through each of the
following series-parallel circuits.
(b)
1 0
‘c\
-I- 1B IA
---E ‘D\
4.28. Write down a statement form representing a condition for flow of current through each of the
folIowing bridge circuits.
(6)
4.29. Draw a switching circuit having the following corresponding statement forms.
(a) [(BvA)&(lBvC)] v (C&IA)
(b) (A&lB&(CvD))v (-IA&(BvC))

4.30. Replace the following series-parallel switching circuits by simpler bridge circuits.
(4
Use at most five switches.
(b)
Use at most ten switches.
(4
L&-ry
-2
c \B\ \E\
\c\ 1G
Use at most seven switches.
4.31. Is there an equivalent bridge circuit simpler than the series-parallel circuit of Fig. 4-13
(Example 4.6)?
4.32. A light is to be controlled from two wall switches such that flicking one of the wall switches changes
the state of the light (“on” to “off”, or “off” to “on”). Construct a switching circuit that will allow
current to flow to the light under the given condition. (Hint: Compare Example 4.6.)
4.33. A municipal board consists of the Mayor, President of the City Council, Comptroller, and three
Borough Presidents. The Mayor has two votes and all the others one vote. A motion obtaining
a majority passes except that any motion opposed by all three Borough Presidents fails. Write a
switching circuit which will indicate passage of a motion.
LOGIC CIRCUITS
4.34. Construct logic circuits corresponding to the following statement forms.
(a) (A& 1B) v (B&(Cv IA))
(b) (A+B)v 1C
4.35. Write down statement forms corresponding to the following logic circuits.
(4
(b) A
I
i
I
1
0v-&-l-&
0 0 0
B
‘1
BINARY NUMBER SYSTEM

4.36. Write the binary notation for the following numbers given in decimal notation: 35, 74, 155, 320.
4.37. Write the decimal notation for the following numbers given in binary notation: 10110, 111011,
10001101.
4.38. Write the ternary notation (base 3) for the numbers given in Problem 4.36.
4.39. Write the decimal notation for the following numbers in ternary notation: 12011, 222110, 10110.
4.40. Solve Problem 4.36 for base 6 and base 8, instead of base 2.
4.41. Do the following additions in the binary system (and check by going over to the decimal system).
(4 11101 (b) 11000
+ 1011 + 101110
4.42. Do the following multiplications in the binary system (and check by going over to the decimal
system).
(4 11101 (b) 11000
x 1011 x 1010
4.43. (CL) Let a non-negative integer less than 10 be given in binary notation: u3u2u1uo. Letting Ai stand
for “ai is l”, construct a logic circuit producing the statement that the given integer is a per-
fect square.
(b) Same as (a), except that the resulting proposition states that the given integer is even.
(c) Same as (a), except that the resulting proposition states that the given integer is a perfect
cube.
4.44. (a) Using half-adders and full adders, draw a logic circuit which carries out the addition of two
four-digit binary numbers.
(b) Same as (a), except that three two-digit numbers are to be added.
4.45. Translate the following decimal integers into binary notation using the method of Problem 4.4:
27, 59, 124.
4.46. Translate the decimal numbers of Problem 4.45 into ternary notation, using a method analogous
to the one given for binary notation.
4.47. Perform the following binary subtractions directly and also by the method indicated in Problem 4.6.
(4 1100110 (b) 1110001 (4 10101
- 111011 - 1011100 - 11010
MINIMAL DISJUNCTIVE NORMAL FORMS. PRIME IMPLICANTS

4.48. Show that
ABCD v ABCD v AED v ABCD v ABCD v A&D v ABCD
is logically equivalent to BCv AD (cf. Example 4.17).
4.49. Under the same assumptions as in Problem 4.7, use don’t care conditions to find a simple switching
circuit for the following properties:
(a) the given number is odd;
(b) the given number is composite (i.e. has a divisor different from 1 and itself).
4.50. Which of the following dnf’s are simpler than the dnf ABC v AR v BCD?
(a) AB v ABC; (b) A v I? v CD v AC; (c) ABCD v ABC; (d) ABCD v AC v A&
4.51. Which of the following are prime implicants of the dnf ABC v AR v BCD?
(a) A, (b) AC, (c) AB6, (d) BC?i.
(Note: There are prime implicants which do not occur in this list.)
4.52. Show that + is logically equivalent to $ v Q, if and only if $ logically implies *.
4.53. Determine whether the fundamental conjunction AB is superfluous in

(a) ABC v AB v BC; (b) AC v SC v /iB.
4.54. Determine whether the fundamental conjunction Bc is superfluous in

tu) ABCD v ABCD v A&D v ~6; (b) BCV .413b v BLI v AEB.
4.55. Show that $Jv rP is logically equivalent to a# v + if and only if + logically implies (Yv 9.
4.56. Determine whether the first occurrence of the literal e is superfluous in

(a) ABe v Ab v CA; (6) AC v Be v AC.
4.57. Determine whether the first occurrence of the literal B is superfluous in

(a) A&v BC v ii’?; (b) /ih2 v BC v AC.
4.58. Find irredundant dnf’s logically equivalent to

(U) ABED V ABD V CD V .dD V fi%; (b) ABD V A6 V ABD V Bcb V BD.
4.59. Prove that a full dnf containing n letters is not a tautology if and only if it has fewer than 2”
disjuncts.
4.60. Find full dnf’s logically equivalent to (a) ABD v ABC; (b) A v BC v AC.
4.61. Carry out the proof of Theorem 4.4, using Lemmas 4.2-4.3.
4.62. Show that if $a logically implies + and +Z logically implies a’, then + logically implies a.
4.63. Find all prime implicants of the following statement forms, using the Quine-McCluskey method.
(a) (ABeG)& AC
(b) AB(?v~BCvA%vAi?C
- _ __
(c) ABCDvABCDv~B~Dv/ii?C~vAl?CD
(d) ABCDZ v A&DE v ABCDE v ABZ‘DE vAB~DEvABCDE
4.64. Do the irredundant dnf’s of Problem 4.58 contain all their prime implicants?
4.65. Prove that a statement form is logically equivalent to the disjunction of all its prime implicants.
4.66. Find all the prime implicants of the dnf in (a) Problem 4.11, (b) Problem 4.51.
4.67. Construct the prime implicant tables for the dnf’s in Problem 4.63b, c, d.
4.68. Find the minimal dnf’s for the dnf’s in Problem 4.63b, c,d, using the Quine-McCluskey method
and prime implicant tables.
4.69. Find the minimal dnf’s for the following dnf’s, using the Quine-McCluskey method and prime im-
plicant tables.
(a) ABCDE v A&DE v ABCDE V A&%E V ABcnE V A&DE
--- ----
v ABCDE v ABCDE v ABCDE v ABCDB
(b) ABED V A&D V A&D V AkD V &CD V hid V A&% V A&% V Ah%
(c) ABCDEG v ABCDEG v ABCDEG v ABCDEG v ABCDEG v ABCDEG v ABcDBG

- --
v ABCDEG v ABCDEG v AMDEG v ABCDEG v ABCD%~~ vABC~MG
- -- - ----
vABCDE~VL-@CD.!?~VABCDEGV~B~~~~~
-- --- -- _-
(d) ABCDE vAWDIZV ABcDB v ABCDE v ABCDE v A&DE
vAl%2DEvABCDEvAB~~EvABf?DE
4.70. Are the irredundant dnf’s of Problem 4.58u, b minimal dnf’s?
4.71. Give a full argument showing that, if + is a full dnf and, in the prime implicant table for a, every
column contains an entry from a row corresponding to a fundamental conjunction in the core,
then the disjunction of the members of the core is the unique minimal dnf for % (cf. Examples
4.25-4.26).
4.72. Verify the assertion in Example 4.29 that members of the secondary core must be a disjunct of
every minimal dnf.
4.73. Find minimal dnf’s for the following dnf’s with don’t care conditions. Use the Quine-McCluskey
method and prime implicant tables.
(a) ABCDE v A&DE v ABCfil? v ABEDI? v A&DE v ABeDI?, with don’t care conditions
- _--
ABCDE, ABcDR, ~Bci%, ABCDB, A~ciiE, ABCDE.
(b) ABCDE v ABCDE v i-iBcDE v Ah?Dl? v tlB@E v Ak?njE, with don’t care conditions
- -- -- ---
ABCDE, ABCDE, ABCDE, ABCBE’, ABC~E”, ABCDE, ABCDE.
(c) Ai%Dl?G v Al?CDEG v ABCDEG v ABCDEG v ABCD@ v ABCijl% v ABCijI?c v

-- ---- _- ---
ABCDEG v ABCDEG, with don’t care conditions ABCDEG, ABCDEG, ABcDEE, iiBcDl?c,
ABCDEG, ABC~IZG, ABcDEG, AB&~EG, ABC~~EB.
4.74. Show that if one fundamental conjunction $i includes another tip, then +a is logically equivalent
to +1v!k?.
4.75. By the consensus method, find all prime implicants of the following dnf’s:
(a) ABC v ABeD v &k’ v Beb; (b) ABCD v AD v BCD v Ah?ij v ABED.
4.76. By the consensus method, find all prime implicants of the dnf’s in:
(a) Problem 4.11, (b) Problem 4.13, (c) Problem 4.63b, (d) Problem 4.69u,c.
4.77. Check the solution to Problem 4.18 by expanding the original dnf into a full dnf and using the
Quine-McCluskey method.
4.78. Apply the consensus method to find all minimal dnf’s for:
-- --
(a) AE v BCE v ABCB v ABCDE; (b) ABC v Bcb v ACD v iifib; (c) A(? v BC v itfj v BD.
Check your results by using the Quine-McCluskey method.
4.79. Apply the consensus method to find all minimal dnf’s for:
(a) dnf in Problem 4.13; (b) dnf’s in Problem 4.69a, b, c, d; (c) dnf’s in Problem 4.75u, b.
KARNAUGH MAPS
4.80. Using Karnaugh maps, find the minimal dnf’s for:
(a) Ai% v ABC v ABC v ABC v ABC
-- --
(b) ABCD v ABC~ v A&D v ABCD v ABCD v ABCD v ABCD
- - --
lc) A&D v A&% v ABCD v ABCD v ABCD v tl~ciiABCD
v
- - --
(d) ABCD v ABCij v &kii v AL?Cb v Ah?D v AiiCD v ABCD
v ABCD v AWi v ABCD v ABCD
-- --
(e) .&?CDE v ABCDE v ABCDE v A&DE v Aik%E v Al?cDE v ABCDE v ABCDE
v Ak?DE v ABCDI? v /iBCfil? v ABCBE v A&Y~E
-- ---
v ABCDE v /iBf%jl? v ABCDE
(f) AB v &DE v tlBd v CD,?? v AB6
4.81. Solve Problem 4.48 by means of a Karnaugh map.
4.82. By use of Karnaugh maps, solve Problems 4.69a, b, c, d and 4.78a, b.


_ - --
ABCDE v ABCDE v ABCDE v ABISE v ABCDE v ABCDE v ABCDE
v ABCDE v ABCDE vAB~DEvAABCDEV ABCDB v ABC~E
v ABCDB v ABCDE v ABCDP v A;BCDE
(Be sure that you are not using superfluous disjuncts.)
4.84. Draw a Karnaugh map for six statement letters, and try to use it to solve Problem 4.69c and
Problem 4.16.
4.85. Using Karnaugh maps, find all minimal dnf’s for the given statement forms, with the indicated
don’t care conditions.
(CC) ABC v ABD v ACD v APO, with the don’t care conditions ABED, L-@CD, ABCD.
(b) ABeDI? v fiBCDEvAl%DEv ABCfiEv A%Dl?vABCDE v ABED@, withthedon’tcare

conditions ABfI%, A&DE.
-- _-
(c) ABC v ABCii v AC, with the don’t care conditions ABED, ABCD, ABCD, ABcfi.
4.86. Find all minimal dnf’s or cnf’s for the statement forms in
(a) Problems 4.13, 4.18, 4.19, 4.21, 4.22.
(b) Problems 4.63b,c,d, 4.69u,b,c,d, 4.78u,b,c, 4.80u-f.
4.87. Find all minimal dnf’s or cnf’s for the following statement forms, with the indicated don’t care
conditions.
- --
(a) Al?CD v ABCD v ABCD, with the don’t care conditions ABCD,ABCD,ABcD,ABcD, ABCD,
- ABCD, ABED, ABcb, as in Problem 4.23.
(b) Same as Problem 4.24.
(c) Same as Problem 4.16.
(d) Same as Problem 4.14.
(e) Same as Problem 4.73u, b, c.

Chapter 5
Topics in the Theory

of Boolean Algebras
5.1 LATTICES
A lattice is an ordered pair (I+ 6) consisting of a non-empty set L together with a
partial order 4 on L satisfying:
(L4) For any x and y in L, the set {x, y} has both a least upper bound (lub) and a greatest
lower bound (glb).
We have seen in Chapter 3 (Theorem 3.9) that a Boolean algebra 5!I determines a lattice
(I?, L), with XV y and x A y as the lub and glb respectively. Therefore it should cause no
confusion if, for any lattice (L, 4) and for any x and y in L, we use x v y and x A y to denote
the lub and glb of {x, y}, respectively.
Example 5.1.
The set {a, b, c, d, e, f} is not a lattice with respect to the partial order pictured in Fig. 5-l. For,
{a, b} has no lub.
Fig. 5-l
Theorem 5.1. For any elements x, y, x of a lattice (L, 4):

(a) xr\x=x and xvx=x (Idempotence)
(b) x~y=yr\x and xvy=yvx (Commutativity)
(C) X A (yA2) = (X A y) A 2 and x v (yv 2) = (Xv y) v 2 (Associativity)
(d) x~(xvy) = x and XV(XA~) = x (Absorption)
(e) x&y f) xAy=x and xLy f) xvy=y
(f) xLy’(XAi?“yAx & xVxLyVx)
Proof. (a) and (b) follow directly from the definition of lub and glb.
(c) First,noticethat XA(YAX) 6 yr\x L x. Also, XA(~AX) 5 y~x 4 y and XA(YAZ) 4 x.
Therefore by definition of glb, x A (y AZ) L x A y. Thus since we have x A (y Ax) 4 2
and X A (yA2) A XAy, it follows by the definition of glb that XA(yAX) 4 (X Ay)~2.
133
134 TOPICS IN THE THEORY OF BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS [CHAP. 5
Using this result twice, we have (x Ay) AX = x/Y (XAY) L @Ax) Ay = YA @Ax) 4
(yA@As = xA(yAx). Thus XA((YAX) A (XAY)AX and (XAY)AX 6 XA(~AX), and

therefore by (PO 3), x A (y Ax) = (X A y) A x. A similar proof shows that
xv(yvx) = (xvy)vx
(d) Clearly, x 6 2 and x 4 XV y. Hence by definition of glb, x L x A (x: v y). But x A (z v y)

L
X. Therefore by (PO 3), x A (X v y) = x. Similarly, x v (x A y) = x.
(e) First, if x A y = X, then x = x A y 6 y. Conversely, if II:6 y, then, by definition of

glb, XAy=X. SiIrdarly, X&y ti Xvy=y.
(f) Assume x 4 y. Then

(XAX) A (y~2) = (Xr\y) A 2 (by (4, (b), (4)
=
x A X (by (e))
Therefore x A x 4 y A x, by (e). Analogously, (XV x) v (y v x) = (XV y) v x = y v 2, and

therefore x v x 6 y v x. )
By a unit 1 of a lattice (L, ‘) we mean an upper bound of the whole set L. It is clear
that, if a unit exists it is unique. By a zero 0 of (L, 6) we mean a lower bound of L, and
clearly, if a zero exists it is unique. Obviously we have OAX = 0, Ovx = x, xv1 = 1,
xA 1= x for all x in the lattice.
A lattice may lack a unit. For example, the set of all finite subsets of the set of integers,
with respect to the partial order C, is a lattice without a unit. A lattice may lack a zero,
e.g. the lattice of all cofinite subsets of the set of integers with respect to the partial order
C. In the lattice determined by a Boolean algebra (B, A~, v%, ‘B, 0,, l,}, 1, is the unit of
the lattice and 0, is the zero of the lattice.
A lattice is said to be distributive if and only if it satisfies the following two laws:
(L5) x A (y Vx) = &A\) V (x Ax);
(L6) X v @AX) = (Xv y) A (Xvi?).
Theorem 5.2. In any lattice, (L5) is equivalent to (L6) (and therefore in the definition of
distributive lattice it suffices to assume either (L5) or (L6)).
Proof. Assume (L5). Then

(x V y) A (x V 2) = [(lt V y) Ax] V [(x V y) Ax] = x V [(x A 2) V (y A x)]
= [x V @Ax)] V (y/lx) = x V (yAx)
Therefore (L6) holds. The proof of (L5) from (L6) is similar and is left to the reader. )
The lattice determined by a Boolean algebra is distributive. (L5) and (L6) are simply
Axioms (3) and (4) for Boolean algebras.
Example 5.2.
The lattice shown in Fig. 5-2 is not distributive. For,
d/\(bvc) = dAl = d
while (dr\b)v(d/\c) = 0~0 = 0
bb\i7*d
??
??
Fig. 5-2
CHAP. 5J TOPICS IN THE THEORY OF BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS 135
A lattice with zero 0 and unit 1 is said to be complemented if, for any x in the lattice,
there exists an inverse x’ in the lattice such that x Ax’ = 0 and xv x’ = 1. Obviously the
lattice determined by a Boolean algebra is complemented.
If a distributive lattice with zero and unit is complemented, then, for any x, the inverse
x’ is unique. To see this, note that the proof of Theorem 3.1 (uniqueness of complements
in Boolean algebras) still is valid under the given assumption.
Theorem 5.3. A complemented distributive lattice (L, ‘) with 0 # 1 determines a Boolean

algebra (L, A, V, ‘, 0, 1).
Proof. Axioms (l)-(2) were proved in Theorem 3.1(b). Axioms (3)-(4) are just the dis-
tributive laws. Axioms (5)-(6) have already been treated above. Axioms (7)-(8) follow
from the fact that the lattice is complemented, and Axiom (9) is part of our hypothesis. )
5.2 ATOMS
A nonzero element b of a Boolean algebra is said to be an atom if and only if, for all
elements x of the Boolean algebra, the condition x G b implies that x = b or x = 0.
Example 5.3.
In the Boolean algebra T(A) of all subsets of a non-empty set A, the atoms are the singletons {z},
i.e. the sets consisting of a single element.
Example 5.4.
The Boolean algebra of all positive integral divisors of 70 (cf. Example 3.4) has as its atoms {2,5,7},
as is evident from Fig. 5-3. (Remember that the integer 1 is the zero element.)
Fig. 5-3
For any atom b and any element x, either b Ax = b or b Ax = 0 (since b AX 4 b).

This has the following consequences:
(i) If b is an atom and b 4 x1 v . . . v xn, then b 4 xi for some i. (For, if b + xi, then
bAXi+ b and SO bAXi=O. Hence if b 4 Xi for all i, then b = b A (XI v . * * v x,) =
(b A xl) v - . . v(b/,X,) = ov -a-v0 = 0, which is a contradiction.)
(ii) If b and c are different atoms, then b A c = 0. (For, if bAc#o, then b=br\c=
c A b = c.)
(iii) If b is an atom and b + x, then b 4 x’. (For, b 6 1 = XV x’, and we then use (i).)
A Boolean algebra is called atomic if and only if, for every nonzero element x of the
algebra, there is some atom b such that 2,d x. The Boolean algebras of Examples 5.3-5.4
are both atomic.
Theorem 5.4. Every finite Boolean algebra is atomic.
Proof. Given a nonzero element xo of the algebra. Assume there is no atom b such
that b 4 x0. In particular, x0 is not an atom and therefore there is some nonzero element
x1 such that x1 4x0 and x1 #x0, i.e. 0 <xl < XO. x1 cannot be an. atom; hence there is
some nonzero element x2 such that x2 < x1. Continuing in this way, we obtain a sequence
x0, Xl, x2, . . . such that x0 > x1 > x2 > . . . .t All the terms of this sequence are distinct
(by Theorem 3.8), contradicting the fact that there are only a finite number of elements
in the algebra. )
Given an element x of a Boolean algebra %, we define q(x) to be the set of all atoms b
of % such that b 4 x. Clearly, ~(0) = $9 and q(1) is the set A of all atoms of %
Lemma 5.5. In an atomic Boolean algebra %, the function + is one-one, i.e. if x f y,

then q(x) # q(y).
Proof. Assume x f y. Then x + y or y + x; say, x f y. Hence x A y’ # 0. Since

48 is atomic, there is an atom b 4 x A y’. Then b 4 x and so b E q(x). However, b 4 y’
and therefore b 4 q(y). (For, if b 4 y, then b 4 y A y’ = 0, and b would have to be 0.)
Hence q(x) f k(y). )
Theorem 5.6. Every finite Boolean algebra 48 has 2” elements, where the positive integer
n is the number of elements in the set A of atoms of CB.
Proof. By Theorem 5.4, CB= (B, A, V, ‘, 0, 1) is atomic, and, by Lemma 5.5, * is a

one-one function from B into the set T(a) of all subsets of A. Now let C be any subset of
A. Since ‘8 is finite, so is A and therefore also C. Thus C = {bl, . . . , bk}. Let x =
bi v . - . v bk. Then q(x) = {bl, . ..,bk}=C. (For, bi’blv***vbk=x for all i. Thus
CC*(X). On the other hand, if b E q(x), then b 6 x = bl v - . . v br. Hence
b = b A x = b A (blv - + - v bk) = (b A bl) v . * * v (by br)
Now if b were different from all the hi’s, then each b A bi = 0 and we would have
b=Ov-- . v 0 = 0 which is impossible. Thus b = bi for some i, i.e. q.(x) CC.) We have
proved that * is a one-one correspondence between B and the whole set T(A). Since A
has n elements, T(A) has 2” elements and therefore B also must have 2” elements. )
Something more can be said about the function q.
Theorem 5.7. If CBis an atomic Boolean algebra, then the function ?l! is an isomorphism
from % into the Boolean algebra T(A). If 9 is a finite Boolean algebra, then
YPis an isomorphism from 9 onto T(A).
Proof. Remember that A is the set of atoms of %, and X@(X)= {b : b E A & b 4 x}.
We already know from Lemma 5.5 that @ is one-one. Next, we show that *(xl) = q(x).
For, on the one hand, if b is an atom and b 6 x’, then b + x. Thus Y&+(X’ C+(X).
) On the
other hand, if b is an atom and b f x, then b 4 x’. Thus G) c*‘(Y). Hence *(xl) = q(x).
Finally, we shall show that +(x A y) = q(x) rl q(y). On the one hand, if an atom b 4 x A y,
then b 6 x and b 6 y. Thus q(x A y) c q(x) n q(y). On the other hand, if b is an
atom and b 5 x dz b L y, then b 6 x A y. Thus q(x) n q-(y) C +(x A y). Hence %‘(X A y) =
*(x)n*(y). Hence q is an isomorphism from B into T(A). When B is finite, the proof of
tWe use the usual conventions: z s y means y 6 x; z > y means y < z; z # y means 1 (z f y); z Q y means
1 (z < Y).
I
!
CHAP. 51
Theorem
Corollary 5.8.
5.6 shows that the range
TOPICS
Any two finite Boolean

isomorphic.
IN THE THEORY
of * is all of T(A). )
algebras
OF BOOLEAN
with
ALGEBRAS
the same number of elements

137
are
Proof. By the second part of Theorem 5.7 and Theorem 5.6, it suffices to show that, if
A and C are finite sets with the same number of elements, then the Boolean algebras T(A)
and T(C) are isomorphic. Let A = {al, . . . , a,} and C = {cl, . . . , c,}. Define the function
0 from T(A) into T(C) as follows: for any subset (~~1, . . ., ajk} of A, let o({ujl, . . . , ujk}) =
{cjl, . . .,cjk}. It is obvious that o is the required isomorphism. )
The second part of Theorem 5.7 shows that any finite Boolean algebra is isomorphic
with a Boolean algebra of all subsets of a set A. This turns out not to be true for arbitrary
infinite Boolean algebras, although, as we shall see later, any Boolean algebra is isomorphic
with a field of sets (i.e. to a subalgebra of the Boolean algebra of all subsets of a set).
5.3 SYMMETRIC DIFFERENCE. BOOLEAN RINGS

In a Boolean algebra % we define the operation + of symmetric difference as follows:
x + y = (x Ay’) V (X’ Ay)
In the Boolean algebra T(A) of all subsets of a non-empty set A, x + y = x A y (cf.

Section 2.6). In the Boolean algebra of statement bundles (cf. Example 3.5), [A] + [B] =
[A-t B], where the second + is the exclusive-or connective.
Theorem 5.9. The operation + has the following properties.

(a) x+y = y+x
(b) x + 0 = x
(c) x + x’ = 1
(d) x + (y +x) = (x + y) + x
(e) XA (y+x) = (x~y) + (XAX)
(f) 2 -I- x = 0
(g)x+y=x+++y=z
(h) 1 4- x = x’
(i) x+y=x+ 2/=x+x
(j) x=zt)x+x=o
Proof.
(a) X +y = (%A\‘) V (x’“y)
y+X = (y~x’)~ (y’~x) = (y’~x)v (y~x’) = (X~y’)v (X’A~)
(b) X +0 = (xA0’) V ( x’A0) = (XAl)Vo = xAl = x
(c) 2 + x’ = (x A (x’)‘) V (X’ Ax’) = (x Ax) V X’ = X V X’ = 1
(d) x + (y +z) = x + ((Y A 2’) V (Y’A 2))

= (x A [(y A 2’) V (y’ Ax)]‘) V (X’ A [(y A 2’) V (y’ A z)])
= [x A (y’ V 2) A (y V z’)] V [(x’ A y A 2’) V (x’ A y’ A x)]
= [XA((~AZ’) v (~/AZ))] v [(X’A~A~‘) v (X’A\‘AZ)]
= (XA~‘A~‘)V (XAYAX)V (X’AYAX’)V (X’AY’AX)

On the other hand, (X + y) + x = x + (X + y). But, to calculate x + (X + y), we use

the equation just found for x + (y +x) after substituting x for 2, x for y, and y for x.
We obtain
x + (x + y) = (x A x’ A y’) v (x A x A y) v (2’A x A y’) v (2’A x’ A y)
= (5 A y’ A if) V (z A y A 2) V (x’ A y A 2’) V (d A y’ A 2)
= x + (y +q
(e) x A (y + z) = x A ((y A 2’) V (y’ A 2)) = (z A y A 2’) V (x A y’ A 2).
(x A y) + (x A 2) = [(x A y) V (x Ax)‘] V [(x A y)’ A (x Ax)]
= [(x A y) A (2’ V x’)] V [(x’ V y’) A (x A x)]
= [yA(~A(~‘V~‘))] V [((X’VY’) A x)Ax)]
= [YAZAX’] v [ZAY’AX] = (XAYAX’) v (XAY’AX)
(f) x + 2 = @Ax’) V (&AZ) = 0 V 0 = 0.
(g) Assume r + y = x+x. Then z+(x+y) = X+($+X). Hence

(x+x)+y = (x+x)+x, o+y = 0+x, y = 2
(h) Add 2 to both sides of (c) and use (f).
(i) Add 2 to both sides of x + y = x and use (f).
(j) Taking y = 0 in (i) yields x = x + x +x = 0. If we exchange y and z in (i) and set

y=O, weobtain x+x=0-,x=x.)
By a ring, we mean a structure T = (R, +, X, 0), where R is a set, + and x are binary
operations on R, and 0 is an element of R, such that
(1) (x+ y) + 2 = x + (y+z);
(2) x + y = y + 2;
(3) 2 + 0 = x;
(4) for any x, there is a unique element (-x) such that x + (-x) = 0;
(5) (xxy)xz = xx(yxx);
(6) xx(y+x) = (xxy)+(xxx);
(7) (y+z) x x = (y x 2) + (2 x 2).
A ring 9 is said to be commutative if and only if, in addition,

(8) x x y = y x x.
A ring T is said to have a unit element if and only if there is an element 1 in R such that
(9) xx1 = lxx = 2.
(Clearly, there cannot be another unit element u, for we would then have u = 1 X u = 1.)
In Theorem 5.9 we have already verified that a Boolean algebra determines the com-
mutative ring (B, +, A, 0) with unit element 1. This enables us to apply the highly developed
algebraic theory of rings to the study of Boolean algebras. But we also can give a more
precise characterization of Boolean algebras in terms of rings, in the following way.
CHAP. 51 TOPICS IN THE THEORY OF BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS 139
A ring % = (R, +, X, 0) is said to be a Boolean ring if and only if it satisfies the

identity
x2 = x
for all x. (Here we employ the usual abbreviation: x2 = x X x.)
Theorem 5.10. Let q = (R, +, X, 0) be a Boolean ring. Then

(a) x + x = 0
(b) x = -x
(c) x+y=o c) x=y
(d) x x y = y x x (Thus the ring must be commutative.)
Proof. First, we observe that for an arbitrary ring the cancellation law x + y = x + x +
y=x holds. For,if x+y=x+x, then
(-x) + (x + y) = (-x) + (x + 2)
((-x) +x) + y = ((-x) +x) + 2
o+y = 0+x
y=x
From the cancellation law it follows that
x=x+x + x=0 (1)
For, if x = x +x, then x + 0 = x +x, and the cancellation law yields x = 0.
(a) x + x = (x+x) x (x +x) = x2 + x2 + x2 + x2 = x + x + x + x. By (I), x + x = 0.

(b) Since x+x = 0, x = (-x) by the uniqueness assumption for (-x) (cf. Axiom (4) for
rings).
(c) If x + y = 0, then, again using x + x = 0, we conclude that x = y by the uniqueness
assumption of Axiom (4).
(d) (x + y) = (x + y) x (x + y) = x2 + (x x y) + (y x x) + y2 = (x + Y) + (x x Y) + (Y x 2).
By (I), 0 = (x x y) + (y x x). Hence by (c), x x y = y x x. )
Theorem 5.11. Let T = (R, +, x, 0) be a Boolean ring with unit element 1 # 0. If we

define
x’ = 1 + x, Xhy = xX$./, xvy = x+y+(xxy)
then 3 = (R, A, V, ‘, 0, 1) is a Boolean algebra.
Proof. We must verify Axioms (l)-(9) for Boolean algebras.

(1) x v y = y v x.
xvy = x+y+(xxy) = y+x+(yxx) = yvx
(2) x A 1/ = y A x. This is just (d) of Theorem 5.10.
(3) X A((YvX) = (ZA~)V (XA~).
X A (y V 2) = 2 x (y + 2 + (2/ x 2)) = (x x y) + (X x 2) + (X x (y x 2))
(xAy)V(xAx) = (~~~)+(~~~)+((~~~)~(X~~))
= (x x y) + (x x 2) + (x2 x y x 2)
= (xxy)+(xxx)+(xxyxx)
(4) x V (?/Ax) = (XV y) A (XV 2).
x V (y A 2) = x + (y x 2) + (x x y x x)
(X ” Y) A (X v 2) = [(X v Y) A X] v [(X v Y) A z] by (3)
= [(x AX) V (YA X)]v [(XA2) V (YA z)] by (3)

= [xv (Yx x)] v [(x x 4 v (Yx 41
= [x + (x x y) + (x x x x y)] v [(x x 2) + (y x 2) + (x x y x x2)]
= [x +(x x Y) + (x x Y)] v [(x x 2) + (y x 2) + (x x y x x)]
= x v [(x x 2) + (y x 2) + (x x y x x)]
= x + (x x x) + (y x 2) + (x x y x 2) + (x x [(x x 2) + (y x 2) + (x x y x x)])
= x+(xxx)+(yxx)+(xxyxx)
+ [(x x (x x 4) + (x x (Yx 4) + (x x (x x Y x 4)] by (3)
= x + (x x 2) + (y x 2) + (x x y x 2) + (x x 2) + (x x y x 2) + (x x y x 2)
= x+(yxx)-+(xxyxx)+[(xxx)+(xxx)]+[(xxyxx)+(xxyxx)]
= x+(yxx)+(xxyxx)
(5) x v 0 = 0.
xv0 = x+0+(xX0) = x+0+0 = x
(Note that we have used the fact that, in any ring, x x 0 = 0. To see this fact, observe
that x x 0 = x x (0 + 0) = (x x 0) + (x x 0); and then by (1) in the proof of Theorem
5.10, x x 0 = 0.)
(6) x A 1 = x.
This is just x x 1 = x, which follows from the definition of a unit element.
(7) xvx’= 1.
xvx’ = x + x’ + (x x x’) = x + (1 +x) + (x x (1 +x))
= 1 + (x+x) + ((x-x 1) + (x x x)) = 1 + 0 + (x+x) = 1 + 0 + 0 = 1
(8) x A d = 0.
XAX = xx(l+x) = (xX1)+(xXx) = x+x = 0
(9) 0 f 1. This is an assumption of the theorem. )
Thus we see that a Boolean ring with nonzero unit element determines a Boolean algebra,
and vice versa any Boolean algebra determines a Boolean ring with nonzero unit element
(essentially Theorem 5.9).
5.4 ALTERNATIVE AXIOMATIZATIONS

There are numerous axiom systems for Boolean algebras.* The following system is a
variation of one due to Byrne [loll.
A Byrne algebra is a structure (B, A, ‘, 0) where B is a set, A is a binary operation on B,
’ is a singular-y operation on B, and 0 is an element of B, satisfying the postulates:
tThe one we have used (Axioms (l)-(9)) is due to Huntington [121]. For systems proposed up to 1933,
cf. Huntington [122]. For later work, cf. Sikorski [148], p. 1, footnote 1.
(Bl) XAy = yAx
(B2) X A (y AZ) = (X A y) A 2
P3) XAX = x
034) xAy’=o c) xAy=x
(B5) 0 # 0’
Let us introduce a few definitions.
Definitions. 1 for 0’
X V y for (X' Ay’)’
x&y for x~y=x
From what we have already proved, it follows that, for any Boolean algebra (B, A, v, I, 0, l),
the structure (B, A, ‘, 0) is a Byrne algebra. The converse is established in the following
theorem.
Theorem 5.12. For any Byrne algebra (B, A, ‘, 0), the structure (B, A, v, ‘, 0,l) is a l3oolean
algebra, where v and 1 are defined as above. In particular,
(a) XAX = 0
xAy’=o H x”y
P)
(4 x4x
x&y&y’x + x=y
(4
x’y&y~x + XL.2
(e)
(f) xAyLx
(9) $A0 = 0
(h) x” = x
(i) x A y = (x’ V y’)’
0) xvy = yvx
(4 x v (yv 2) = (xv y) v 2
(4 xvx = x
Cm) x&y w y‘&x’

(n> xvy’=l t) xvy=x
(0) Duality: Any theorem in the language of Byrne algebras (i.e. involv-
ing the symbols A, ‘, 0) is transformed into another theorem when we
replace A by V, and 0 by 1. Under this replacement, the defined term
x v y (i.e. (x’ A y’)‘) becomes (x’ v y’)‘, which is equal to x A y, and the
defined term 1 (i.e. 0’) becomes l’, which is equal to 0 (by (h)). Thus
the dual of a theorem is a theorem.
(P) x’y t) xvy=y. (Hencethedua .I of x 6 y is equivalent to y 4 x.)
XAl = x
Cd
xv0 = x
(4
(4 xvx’ = 1
(t) x 52 xvy
(4 xV(XAy) = xA((xVy) = x
(v) x&y + (XAXL~AX & XvXLyvX)

(zu) (x~x& y'x) + xvy~x

(X) (xsX&xgy) + xgxAy
(Y) X A (x’V y) = x A y
(XI) xA (yV2) = (xAy)V (xA2)
(x2) x V (y Ai?) = (xv y) A (XVX)
(x3) Axioms (l)-(9) for Boolean algebras hold.
Proof.
(4 x A x = x. Hence by (B4), x A x’ = 0.
(b) This follows immediately from (B4) and the definition of L.
(c) This follows immediately from (B3) and the definition of A.
(d) Assume x’y & y’x. Then xAy=x & yAx=y. By(Bl), x=y.
(e) Assume xsy & y&x. Then x~y=x & yAz=y. Hence XAX = (XA~)AX =
xA(yAx) = xAy =X. Thus X&X.

(f) (x A v) A x = (x A x) A y = x A y. Thus x A y 4 x.
(9) x A 0 = x A (x A x’) = (x A x) A x’ = x A x’ = 0.
(h)
x” A x’ = = xf A x”
0 (by (a)). Therefore x” 5 x (by (b)). Likewise, x”’ 6 x’ and
x”” 4 x’t. Hence
x,,” & x (by (e)). Therefore x”” A x’ = 0 (by (b)). Hence x’ 4 x”’
(by (b)), and therefore x’ = x”’ (by (d)). Thus x Ax”’ = 0 (by (a)), and then x 4 x”
(by (b)). Therefore x = x” (by (d)).
(9 x’ V y’ = (x” A y”)’ = (x A y)‘. Hence (X’v y’)’ = (X A y)” = X A y.
t j) x V y = (x’ A y’)’ = (y’ A d)’ = y V x.
(14 x V (y V 2) = (x’ A (y’ A f)“)’ = (d A (y’ A 2’))‘.
(x”y) V ?? = 2 V (xVy) = (&A (x’ Ay’))’ = (x’A (y’A2’))‘.
(0 x V x = (x’ Ax’)’ = x” = x.
(m) Assume x 5 y. Then x A y’ = 0 (by (b)). Therefore y’ A x” = 0, and, by (b), y’ L x’.

Conversely, if y’ L x’, then x” 6 y”. Hence x 4 y.
(n) y g x t) x’ 6 y’ (by (m)). Therefore x’ A y = 0 c) x’ A y’ = x’. Hence (x’ A y)’ =
0’ - (x’ A y’)’ = x” andso xvy’=l c) xvy=x.
(0) Changing A to v and 0 to 1 transforms the axioms for Byrne algebras into theorems.
((Bl) becomes (j); (B2) becomes (k); (B3) becomes (1); (B4) becomes (n); and (B5) becomes
1 # 1’ which by (h) is equivalent to 1 # 0.) Hence if we make these changes in all
propositions of a proof, we obtain a proof of the transformed theorem.
(P) x”y H y/Lx’
tf y’ A x’ = y’
tf (y’ A x’)’ = y”
e xvy = y
(4 0 L x’, by (9). x 4 1, by (m) and (h). Therefore x A 1 = x.

(r) This is the dual of (q).
(s) This is the dual of (a).
tt) This is the dual of (f).
w x A y 6 x, by (f). Hence by (p), (x A y) v x = x. The dual of this is (XV y) A x = x.
(v) Assume x L y. Then x A y = x. Hence (XAX)A(ZJAX) = (XAY)AX = XAX. Thus

XAX’-PAX. Also, since x 4 y, we have, by (p), x v y = y. Hence (xv x) v (y v x) =
(xvy)vx = yvx, and so by(p), xvx 4 yvx.
(w) Assume x&z& y’x. Then X=XVX=XV~. Therefore xv(xvy) = (xvx)vy =

xvy = 2. Hence x v y L x.
(x) This is the dual of (w).
(Y> X A (x’ v y) = X A (x” A y’)’ = x A (x A y’)‘. Hence

(x A (X’V y)) A y’ = (x A y’) A (x A y’)’ = 0
Then by (B4), x A (x’v y) = ( XA ( X’vy))~y = X~((X’vy)~yy) = XA~ (by(u)).

(x1) First, yLyvx & x”yvx (by (t)). Therefore by (z)), XA~~XA(~VX) & XAX&
x A (y v 2). Hence by (w), (x A y) v (x A 2) 4 x A (y v 2). On the other hand,

x A (yVz) A ((XAy) V (XAX)) = x A (yvx) A (XAy)’ A (XAX)
= XA(~VX)A(X’V~‘)A(X’VX’)
= (y V 2) A (x A (x’ V y’)) A (x A (x’ V 2’))
= (yvz) A @A\‘) A (x”x’) (by(y))
= x A (y V 2) A (y’ A x’)
= x A (y’ A 2’)’ A (y’ A 2’)
= XAO = 0
Hence x A (yvx) L (xA y) v (x AZ), by (b)). Now apply (d).

(x2) is the dual of (x1).
(z3) All the Axioms (l)-(9) for a Boolean algebra already have been proved. )
5.5 IDEALS
An ideal of a Boolean algebra 3 = (B, A, v, ‘, 0,l) is a non-empty subset J of B such
that:
(i) (zEJ& yEJ) + XV~EJ
(ii) (sEJ & YEB) + XA~EJ
It is clear that (ii) is equivalent to

(ii’) (XEJ & y”x) + YE J
For, assume (ii) and let x E J & y 6 x. Then since y 6 x, we have y = x A y. Hence by
(ii), y E J. Conversely, assume (ii’) and let x E J & y E B. Since x A y 6 x, it follows by
(ii’) that x A y E J.
Notice that 0 belongs to every ideal, since 0 4 x for all x.
Example 5.5. (0) is an ideal.
Example 5.6. B is itself an ideal.
Every ideal different from B is called a proper ideal. In particular, (0) is a proper ideal.
Note: An ideal J is proper if and only if 1 4 J. For, if 1 4 J, then JC B. Conversely,
iflEJandifyEB,theny’l. Hence by (ii’), y E B. Thus J = B.
Example 5.7.
If A is a non-empty set and if P(A) is the Boolean algebra of all subsets of A, then the set J of all
finite subsets of A is an ideal. J is proper if and only if A is infinite. (More generally, if m is any
infinite cardinal number, the set of all subsets of cardinality less than m is an ideal.)
Example 5.8.
Given u E B, the set J, of all v f u is an ideal. For, if wi f u and v2 5 u, then ~1 v vs f u; and if
v f u and y 4 v, then y f u. The ideal J, is called the principal ideal generated by u.
Theorem 5.13. Given any subset C of a Boolean algebra 23, the intersection W of all ideals
J containing C (i.e. such that CcJ) is itself an ideal containing C. W is
said to be generated by C, and is denoted Gen (C).
Proof. There is at least one ideal containing C, namely B itself. Assume x and y are in
W, and x is in B. If J is any ideal containing C, then x E J & y E J. Hence x v y E J.
Likewise, x Ax E J. Thus x v y and x Ax are in W, and therefore W is an ideal. )
Theorem 5.14. Given any subset C of a Boolean algebra, the ideal Gen (C) consists of all
elements of the form
(yl A xl) V * ’ * V (yk A xk), k?l
where x1, . ..,XkEC and yl,. . . , yk are arbitrary elements of B.
Proof. Let D be the set of elements of the given form. The join of any two elements
of D is clearly again of the same form and therefore also in D. In addition, for any y E B,
the meet
y A ((yl A XI) V ’* ’ V (yk A xk)) = (y A (yl A xl)) v ’ * . V (y A (yk A Xk))
= ((yAyl)Axl) v --’ v ((yAyk)AXk)
is again in D. Thus D is an ideal. Since x = 1 A x, every member x of C is in D. Every

member (yl A xl) v - . . v (yk A xk) of D belongs to any ideal J containing C, for, since xi E C,
it follows that yi A xi E J and therefore that (x1 A yl) v - . . v (xk A yk) E J. Hence D iS the
intersection of all ideals containing C. )
Theorem 5.15. Given any subset C of a Boolean algebra 9, the ideal Gen (C) consists of
the set E of all y such that
y L x1 v * ’’ v xk
where x1, . . . , xk are arbitrary members of C.
Proof. If y 5 Xi, v - . . v Xik and x6 ~j, v * . * v Xj,, then

y V 2 L xi1 V * * * V xi, V xj, A ’ * . V xj,,,
andif yAxlv.-. v xk and v g y, then v 4 z1 v - . +v xk. Thus E is an ideal. In addition,

if x is in C, then x 4 x and therefore x is in E. Clearly, every member of E belongs to every
ideal containing C. Hence E = Gen (C). )
Corollary 5.16. If C is any subset of a Boolean algebra CB,then the ideal Gen (C) generated
by C is a proper ideal if and only if
XIV ** ‘Vxk # 1
for all xl, . . ..xkin c.
Proof. Note first that 1 4 u if equivalent to 1 = u, for any u. Hence by Theorem 5.15,
lEGen if and only if l=xlV”-Vxk for some rl,...,xk in C. But, lEGen(C)if
i and only if Gen (C) is not a proper ideal. )
Theorem 5.17. If J is an ideal of a Boolean algebra 48, and if y E B, then the ideal
Gen (JU {y}), generated by J plus y, consists of all elements of the form
(2 A Y) ” x
where x E B and x E J.
Proof. Let H be the set of all elements (x A y) v x, where x E B and x E J. First, y E H,

since y = (1 A y) v 0. Also, if v E J, then v = (O~y)vv EH. Thus JU{y} cH. In
addition,
((XI A y) v XI) v (@,A y) v x2) = ((XI v x2) A y) v (XI v x2) E H
Also, if x E J, then
w A ((x A y) v x) = ((w A x) A y) v (w A x) E H
Hence H is an ideal. Finally, if Z is an ideal containing J U {y}, and if x E J, then (x A y) v x

E I; thus I> H. )
Corollary 5.18. If J is an ideal of a Boolean algebra %, and if y E B-J, then the ideal
Gen (J U {y}) generated by J plus y is a proper ideal if and only if x v y Z 1
for all x in J, i.e. if and only if, for all x in J, y’ =b x.
Proof. By Corollary 5.16, Gen (JU {y}) is proper if and only if x1 v . * * v xk v y f 1

for all x1, . . . , xk in J. (Note that if x1 v . . . v xk v y # 1, then x1 v * * . v xk # 1.) But since
J is an ideal, x = x1 v - . . v xk is also in J. Hence the indicated condition is equivalent to
saying that x v y # 1 for all x in J. The additional remark follows from the fact that
xv y = 1 is equivalent to y’ 4 x. )
Definition. An ideal M of a Boolean algebra 48 is said to be maximal if and only if M

is a proper ideal and there is no proper ideal J of CBsuch that MC J.
Theorem 5.19. Given a proper ideal M of a Boolean algebra % Then M is maximal if

and only if, for any y in B, either y E M or y’ E M.
Proof.
(a) Assume M is maximal. Assume y 4 M. We must show that y’ E M. Let Z = Gen (MU {y}).
Then Z is an ideal of % such that M c I. Hence by the maximality of M, Z = B. There-
fore by Corollary 5.18, y’ G x for some x in M. Since M is an ideal, y’ EM.
(b) Assume that y E M or y’ E M for all y in B. Assume MC J, where J is an ideal. We
must prove that J = B. Let y E J-M. Since y 4 M, y’ EM. Hence y’ E J. Then
1 = yvy’EJ. Therefore J=B.)
Definition. An ideal J in a Boolean algebra ‘B is prime if and only if, for any x and y
in B, (x 4 J & y G J) + x A y 4 J.
Theorem 5.20. A proper ideal J in a Boolean algebra % is maximal if and only if it is

prime.
Proof.
(a) Assume J is maximal. Assume x 4 J & y 4 J. Then by Theorem 5.19, x’ E J and y’ E J.
Hence x’ v y’ E J. Since J is proper, x A y = (x’ v y’)’ 4 J. Thus J is prime.
(5) Assume J prime. Given y E B. By Theorem 5.19 it suffices to show that y E J or
y’EJ. Assume y4 J and y’4 J. Since J is prime, O=y~y’eJ which is a
contradiction. )
Theorem 5.21. The maximal principal ideals are the principal ideals J,,, where u is an
atom.
Proof.
(a) Assume u is an atom. To prove J,, maximal, we shall use Theorem 5.19. Assume
y E B and y 4 J,,. Then y 4 u’. Hence u f y’. Since u is an atom, u 4 y (by Remark
(iii) on page 135). Hence y’ g u’, i.e. y’ E J,,.
(b) Assume J,, maximal. To prove that u is an atom, we assume v 4 u and we must show
that v = 0 or v = u. Assume v # u. Since J,, is maximal, v E J,, or v’ E J,!. Hence
v 6 u’ or vu’g u’, i.e. v of u’ or u 6 v. But u 4 v, since v 6 u & v # u. Hence v L u’.
Since v 6 u and v 5 u’, it follows that v 4 u Au’ = 0. Therefore v = 0. )
Example 5.9.
In the Boolean algebra T(A) of all subsets of a non-empty set A, the atoms are the singletons {a},
where aEA. Hence a maximal principal ideal consists of all subsets X of A such that u 4X.
Example 5.10.
In a finite Boolean algebra %, every maximal ideal M is principal. For, there are a finite number of
atoms ai, . . . , ak in B, and aIva2~~-~vak=1. Hence there is some atom a which is not in M. Then
M = J,,. To see this, observe first that since a 4 M, then a’ EM. Therefore J,, c M. On the other hand,
if yEM, then aPy since a4M. Since a is an atom and a 4 y, it follows that a L y’, and so Y f a’.
Therefore M c J,,,.
5.6 QUOTIENT ALGEBRAS

Let J be an ideal of a Boolean algebra ‘B.
Definition. x -J y if and only if x + y E J.
Recall that x + y = (x A y’) v (x’ A y) (cf. Section 5.3). Hence, since J is an ideal,
x~J&yfiZJ + x+y~J.
Theorem 5.22. If J is an ideal of a Boolean algebra %,

(a) x =J x.
(b) x =J y --, y =J x.
(c) x =J y & y =J .?i + x =J 2.
(d) (x=Jy & a=Jb) + (x’=Jy’& xAa=JyAb & xVo=JyVb).
Proof.
(a) x +x = 0 E J.
(b) x + y = y + x.
(c) x+x = x+0+x = x+(y+y)+z = (x+y)+(y+z).
(d) Assume x =J y and a =J b. Since X’ + y’ = x + y, it fOllOWS that X’ =J y’. Next,

notice that for any 2, (x A 2) =J (y A z), since (x A 2) + (y A 2) = (x + y) A 2. Hence
XAU=JyAa = oAy=JbAy = y/\b
Lastly, x v a = (x’ A a’)’ =J (y’ A b’)’ = y v b b
Definition. [x] = {y : x =J y}
[x] is called the equivalence class of x modulo J. Clearly, x E [x].

Theorem 5.23. (a) [x] = [x] t) x =J x.
(b) [xl f Lx1+ [xl” Cxl= @*

Proof.
(a) First, assume [x] = [x]. Since x E [xl, we obtain x E [xl, i.e. x =J x. Second, assume
x =J 2. Then for any y,
YE I34+ x ‘J y + ?i =J y + y E [z]
Hence [x] c [xl. Similarly, [x] c [xl. Therefore [x] = [xl.
(b) Y E [xl n I4 + (x=Jy & x=Jy) + xEJz + [x]=[x].,
Given an ideal J of the Boolean algebra %. Let B/J be the set of equivalence classes
modulo J. We define operations A~, vJ, ‘J on B/J as follows:
[‘I AJ [y] = Lx A y]
[‘I vJ [y] = Lx ” y]
[X]‘J = [X’]
These definitions are meaningful by virtue of Theorem 5.22(d). For example, if X and Y
are equivalence classes modulo J, we select any x E X and any y E Y. If x1 E X and yl E Y,
then [x A y] = [X~Ayl] by virtue of Theorem 5.22(d) and Theorem 5.23(u). Thus [x A y]
does not depend upon the particular x chosen in X or the particular y chosen in Y. This
shows that our definition of ~~ makes sense.
Let OJ stand for [O], and let 15 stand for [l]. Clearly, OJ = J and 13 = {y : y’ E J}.
Let WJ stand for (BIJ, AJ, vJ, ‘J, O,,lJ).
Theorem 5.24. If J is a proper ideal of a Boolean algebra %, then LB/Jis a Boolean algebra
(called the quotient algebra of 48 by J).
Proof. We must check the axioms for Boolean algebras.
(1) [xl ” [Yl = [xv Y] = [Y”xl = [Yl” [xl.

Axioms (2)-(8) are proved in a similar manner. (This is left as an exercise for the reader.)
(9) OJ # 15, since 0 +J 1. (This follows from the equation 0 -I- 1 = 1 and the assumption
that J is a proper ideal.) )
Example 5.11.
Let J be the ideal (0). Then x =J y if and only if z = y. Thus the elements of B/J are the single-
tons {z}, where x E B. The function f(z) = (5) is an isomorphism between 9 and g/(O).
Theorem 5.25. B/J = (OJ, 15) if and only if J is a maximal ideal.
Proof. If J is maximal, then, for any x, either x E J or x’ E J. Hence [x] = OJ or

[x] = 1~. Conversely, assume that for every x in B, [x] = OJ or [x] = 15. Hence x E J or
x’ E J. Therefore by Theorem 5.19, J is maximal. )
Remark. If x E B, then [x] = x + J, where x + J stands for {x + u : u E J}. For, on

the one hand, y E [x] +x+y~J+x+y=u forsomeuin J+y=x+u forsomeuEJ.
On the other hand, if y = x + u for some u in J, then y + x = u E J, and therefore y E [xl.
5.7 THE BOOLEAN REPRESENTATION THEOREM

The theory of Boolean algebras is intended to be a generalization of the algebra of sets.
We already have proved (Theorem 5.7) that every finite Boolean algebra is isomorphic to the
Boolean algebra of all subsets of some set A (namely, A is the set of atoms). This is not
true for all Boolean algebras. For, in Problem 5.16 we cite an example of an atomless
Boolean algebra CB;and since the Boolean algebra T(A) of all subsets of any set A is atomic,
% cannot be isomorphic to T(A). However, we shall show in what follows that every Boolean
algebra is isomorphic to some field of sets.
To this end, we shall need the following general mathematical principle.
Zorn’s Lemma: Given a set 2 of sets such that, for every C-chain C in Z,t the union
AliJCA is also in 2. Then there is an C-maximal set M in 2, i.e. M E 2,
and, if A is any set in 2, then M # A.
A proof of Zorn’s Lemma (based upon the use of a more transparent assumption, the
so-called axiom of choice) is given in Appendix C.
Theorem 5.26 (Maximal Ideal Theorem). If J is a proper ideal in a Boolean algebra S8:
then there is a maximal ideal M in % such that JC M (i.e. every proper
ideal can be extended to a maximal ideal).
Proof. Assume J is a proper ideal. Let 2 be the class of all proper ideals K in LBsuch
that J c K. Now assume that C is an c-chain in 2. Then I yc Z is a proper ideal (cf.
Problem 5.34) containing J. Hence by Zorn’s Lemma there is a maximal set M in 2. But
M > J and M is a maximal ideal in 9 (for, if M# is any proper ideal such that M c M#, then
M# EZ and hence M = M*). )
Example 5.12.
Consider the Boolean algebra T(A) of all subsets of an infinite set A. Let J be the ideal of all finite
subsets of A. By Theorem 5.26, J can be extended to a maximal ideal M. M cannot be a principal ideal.
(For, a principal maximal ideal consists of all subsets of A not containing some fixed element b of A
(cf. Example 5.9), while every singleton {b}, being finite, belongs to J and therefore to M. Hence if M
were principal, we would have A = {b} u (A - {b}) EM, and then M would not be a proper ideal.) No way
is known for describing such an ideal M in a constructive way, i.e. no property is known for which the
sets satisfying this property form a maximal ideal M containing J as a subset.
Corollary 5.27. Every Boolean algebra has at least one maximal ideal.
Proof. The set {0} is an ideal. Hence by Theorem 5.26, (0) can be extended to a
maximal ideal. )
Corollary 5.28. If C is any subset of a Boolean algebra % such that for any ~1, . . . , u,, in
c, 241v * *. VU,, # 1, then there is a maximal ideal M containing C.
Proof. By Corollary 5.16, the ideal Gen (C) generated by C is a proper ideal. Then
by Theorem 5.26 there is a maximal ideal M containing Gen (C), and therefore also
containing C. )
tBy an c-chain C in Z we mean a subset of Z such that, if A EC and BE C and A + B, then either
A C B or B c A. More generally, if R is a binary relation on a set W, then an R-chain in W is a subset
of W on which R is transitive, connected, and antisymmetric (i.e. xRy & yRx -f x = y).
Corollary 5.29. If x is a nonzero element of a Boolean algebra ‘i3, there is a maximal ideal
M not containing the element x.
Proof. 2’ # 1. Hence by Corollary 5.28 there is a maximal ideal M containing x’.

Hence x 4 M. (Otherwise, 1 = XV x’ E M.) )
Theorem 5.30. (Stone’s Representation Theorem). Every Boolean algebra % is isomorphic

to a field of sets.
Proof. For each x in B, let Z(x) be the set of all maximal ideals of 53 such that x 4 M.
Clearly, E(1) is the set 34 of all maximal ideals of 9, while E(0) is the empty set. For any
x Z 0, Z(x) is non-empty, by Corollary 5.29. Also, Z(x’) = Z:(x), since every maximal ideal
M contains precisely one of the elements x and x’. Finally, Z(x v y) = Z(x) UE(y). (First,
if x@M, then xvy4M, since XLXV~. Likewise, if y 4 M, then x v y 4 M. Hence
Z(x) U e(y) c Z(x v y). Conversely, if x EM & y EM, then xv y E M. Hence if xv y 6? M,
then x 6! M or y 4 M. Therefore S(x v y) c Z(x) U Z(y).) Thus S is an isomorphism of 23
into the Boolean algebra T(N) of all subsets of the set 34 of all maximal ideals. The range
of B is a field of sets isomorphic to 3. )
Corollary 5.31. For any sentence A of the theory of Boolean algebras, A holds for all
Boolean algebras if and only if A holds for all fields of sets.
(By a sentence of the theory of Boolean algebras we mean either an equality 7 = U, where
T and v are Boolean expressions, or an expression obtained from such equalities by applying
the logical connectives and the quantifiers “for all x” and “there exists an x”.)
5.8 INFINITE MEETS AND JOINS

Given a Boolean algebra 53 = (B, A, V, ‘, 0,l) and a subset A of B. If the least upper
bound (lub) of A exists, it is denoted v x and called the join of A. Thus in order for y
XEA
to be the join of A, it is necessary and sufficient that:

(a) x L y for all x EA.
(b) For any o, if x L v for all x E A, then y 4 v.
If the greatest lower bound (glb) of A exists, it is denoted A x and called the meet of A.
XEA
Notice that
VP” = 0, AoX = 1
v x = 1, A x=0
XEB ZEB
Definition. The Boolean algebra LBis said to be complete if and only if V x and A x
ZEA XEA
exist for all subsets A of B, i.e. every subset of B has both a lub and a glb.
Example 5.13.
I In the field T(K) of all subsets of a non-empty set K,
V x= uz and A 5= nz
XEA ZEA
I ZEA ZEA
Thus T(K) is a complete Boolean algebra.

I
Theorem 5.32. (De Morgan’s Laws)
(4 .YA x = ( Aa w)
P) Aa x = ( .ya w)
(Each equation is taken to mean that, if one side has meaning, then so does the other, and
they are equal.)
Proof. (a) Assume .y, x exists, and let y = (,xA x)‘. Now if u EA, then u 4 zyA x.
Hence y L u’. Thus y is a lower bound of the set W of all x’, where x EA. Now assume v
is a lower bound of W. Thus v 4 x’ for all x EA. Hence x Lv’ for all x EA. Thus
v x 4 v’. Hence v 4 (,‘$, x)’ = y. We have shown that y = z$A (2’). Hence .yA x =
XEA
y’ = ( A (x’))‘. On the other hand, assume .,$a (x’) exists. Let b = (,?, (xl))‘. If u E A,
XEA
then z$A (x’) g u’. Hence us b. Thus b is an upper bound of A. If c is an upper bound
of A, then x L c for all x E A; this implies that ~‘4 x’ for all x EA. Hence c’ 6 A (x’),
XEA
and b = (,$A (XI))’ 5 c. Therefore b = .:a x. The proof of (b) is similar. )
Corollary 5.33. If all subsets of B have a meet (respectively, a join), then B is complete.
Example 5.14.
Let S be the Boolean algebra of all finite and cofinite sets of positive integers. Let A be the set of all
sets of the form {2n}, where n is a positive integer, i.e. A is the set of singletons of the positive even integers.
Then A has no join. For, if u were equal to V 2, then u would have to contain all positive even integers.
ZEA
But, since u would be cofinite, u would also have to contain all but finitely many odd positive integers.
Then any proper subset of u obtained by removing an odd integer also would be an upper bound of A,
contradicting the assumption that u is the least upper bound of A. Thus % is not complete.
Example 5.15.
Let A be the field of sets consisting of all finite sets of positive integers and all sets N-X, where N
is the set of all non-negative integers and X is any finite set of positive integers. A is a subfield of the
field F(N) of all subsets of N. Let C be the set of all singletons of the form {n}, where n is a positive
integer. Then the join of C in the Boolean algebra T(N) is N - (0). However, the join of C in the
Boolean algebra A is N. (Notice that N - (0) does not belong to A.) This illustrates two facts:
(1) The join of a set in a field of sets is not necessarily the union. (In Example 5.15, the union
of C is N - (0) but the join in A is N.)
(2) If Al is a Boolean subalgebra of a Boolean algebra A,, and if Y is a set of elements of A,,
then the join of Y in A, (if it exists) is not necessarily the join of Y in A, (if it exists).
Of course the same facts hold for meets as well as joins,
Because of the fact illustrated in (2), we shall, if necessary, designate the join in a Boolean algebra
B of a set Y of elements by v 3 x, and the meet by A‘B 2.
ZEY XEY
Definition. By a complete field of sets we mean a field of sets such that, for any subset
A of the field, the union and intersection of the sets in A are also in the field. The field
T(K) of all subsets of a non-empty set K is an example of a complete field of sets. Clearly,
a complete field of sets is a complete Boolean algebra, with union and intersection serving
as join and meet.
5.9 DUALITY
If % = (B, A, v, ‘, 0,l) is a Boolean algebra, then its dual %* = (B, v, A, ‘, 1,O) is also
a Boolean algebra. In fact, the function f(x) = x’ is an isomorphism between 3 and %*
(cf. Problem 5.42).
Theorem 5.34. (Duality Principle). For any Boolean sentence A, the dual formula A*,
obtained from A by exchanging 0 and 1 and exchanging A and v, will be
true for !B if and only if A is true for 48.
Proof. A is true for % if and only if it is true for the isomorphic algebra 48*. But the
interpretation of A with respect to the model “8* is the same as the interpretation of A*
with respect to l3. )
There are various extensions of the Duality Principle. The transformation from A to
the dual A* exchanges 6 and 1. (For, x g y * z A y = x, and the dual of x A y = z is
XV y = x, which is equivalent to x 1 y.) In addition, the taking of duals interchanges the
general notions of meet and join.
Example 5.16.
The second part of DeMorgan’s Laws (Theorem 5.32)
I
@) A x = v (x0
ZEA ( 2EA )
is the dual of the first part:
(4 v 5 =
XEA (z?A(~‘))’
Hence our proof of (a) automatically is also a proof of (b).
Example 5.17.
From v x=0, it follows by duality that A s=l. Similarly, A 5 = 0 follows from
zeg, ZEB 5EB
v x=1.
ZEB
5.10. INFINITE DISTRIBUTIVITY

Theorem 5.35. (a) x A %:A u = JA (x AU).
(b) x v A u = A @vu).
UEA UEA
(These equations are intended to mean that, if the left side is meaningful, then the right
side is also meaningful and the two sides are equal.)
Proof. Since (b) is the dual of (a), it suffices to prove (a). As a preliminary, note that
aAb 4 c --f b s a’vc (5.1)
(For, if ur\b-“c, then b = (u’Ab)v(uAb) 4 u’vc.) By taking the dual of (5.1) and
changing a to a’, we obtain
csu’vb + aAclb (5.2)
Assume now that v u exists. If v E A, then v =G V u and therefore

UEA UEA
XAV &xA/\u
UEA
Thus x A ,ya u is an upper bound of the set Z of all x AU, where u EA. Now assume w
is an upper bound of the set 2. Then for all u E A, x AU 4 w; and therefore by (5.1),
u 2s x’vw. Hence v u 4 x’v w. By (5.2), x A V u 4 w. Thus x A v u =
UEA UEA UEA
v @AU).)
u E A
Remark. If the right-hand side of (a) or (b) of Theorem 5.35 is meaningful, the left-hand
side need not be. For example, if x = 0, then ,yA (x A u) = 0, but u yA u need not exist
if 48 is not complete.
By means of the ordinary distributive laws, one obtains identities of the form
(x11 v x12v . . - V Xlkl) A ($21 V x22 V - - ’ V X2k2) A ’ * ’ A (XmlV%,,ZV “-‘.‘%nk,)
For example,
(xl, V x12) A (x21 V x22 V x23) = (x II A x21) V (xl1 A x22) V (x11 A 223) V (xl2 A x21)
V (xl2 A x22) V (xl, A x23)
One even can extend these identities to the following infinite case.
= (5.3)
j, yA, (‘ljl A x2j2 A * ’ + A Xkj,)
I t
where the join on the right is taken over all possible terms xljl A XZJ,A * * * A xkjk, with
j, E AI, . . . , jk E Ak, and where we assume that all the joins on the left-hand side exist.
This identity is proved by induction on k, using Theorem 5.35(a) (plus generalized associ-
ativity; cf. Problem 5.37).
For any sets S and W, let SW stand for the set of all functions from W into S. Assume
given a function assigning to each w E W and s E S an element x~,~ of a given Boolean
algebra %. Consider
where the join on the right extends over all functions f E SW.
Definition. If m and n are cardinal numbers, the Boolean algebra % is said to be

(m, n)-distributive if and only if, whenever W has cardinal number m and S has cardinal
number n and xw,$ is any assignment of elements of B such that the left-hand side of (5.4)
makes sense and each term A xw,fcw) on the right-hand side makes sense, then the right-
WEW
hand side makes sense and the equation (5.4) holds.
% is said to be completely distributive if and only if l3 is (m, n)-distributive for all

cardinals m and n. 48 is said to be m-distributive if and only if 9 is (m, m)-distributive.
We have seen above (equation (5.3)) that if m is finite every Boolean algebra is (m, II)-
distributive, no matter what n is. Obviously (m, n)-distributivity also holds when n = 1.
However, if m is infinite and n% 2, then a Boolean algebra need not be (m, n)-distributive,
even when II is finite.
It is easy to see that, if CBis (m, n)-distributive, then
(4 & --Lm + % is (@,n)-distributive;

(b) P g n + 48 is (m, #)-distributive.
To verify (a), it suffices to choose a set W* such that Wrl W* = $Zj and WU W* has cardi-
nality m, and then to extend the given assignment by letting x~,~ = 1 for all w E W*. To
prove (b), we need only choose a set S* so that Sn S* = $Zj and SUS* has cardinality n, and
then extend the given assignment by letting x~,~ = 0 for all s E S*.
From (a) and (b) it follows that ?l is completely distributive if and only if % is m-dis-
tributive for all m.
It can be shown that 3 is m-distributive if and only if 48 is (m, 2)-distributive (cf. [I401
and [149]).
Example 5.18.
The field T(K) of all subsets of a non-empty set K is completely distributive. This follows from the
fact that
always holds for arbitrary sets x,,, .
Remark. By the Duality Principle, it is not necessary to give separate consideration to

the dual of (5.4):
5.11 m-COMPLETENESS
Let m be an infinite cardinal number. A Boolean algebra 9 is said to be m-complete if
and only if every subset of B having cardinal number Lnt possesses a least upper bound
(lub) and a greatest lower bound (glb).
By De Morgan’s Laws (Theorem 5.32), for m-completeness it suffices to know only that
every subset of B having cardinal number drn possesses a lub (or that every subset of B
having cardinal. number g m possesses a glb).
If HO is the cardinal number of the set of integers, it is customary to use the term
u-algebra instead of Ho-complete Boolean algebra. Thus l3 is a a-algebra if and only if every
denumerable subset of B has a lub.
We shall use the term m-comp2ete jie2d of sets for a field of sets 7 such that any subset
of JJ of cardinality gnt has its union in 7. In addition, by a a-field of sets we mean a field
of sets closed under denumerable unions.
Clearly, an m-complete field of sets is an m-complete Boolean algebra, and a o-field of
sets is a a-algebra.
Example 5.19.
Let K be a non-denumerable set. The field 10 of all subsets of K which are either countable (i.e. either
finite or denumerable) or co-countable (i.e. their complement is countable) is a a-field, but not a complete
field of sets (nor a complete Boolean algebra). For, let A be a subset of K such that both A and its
complement are non-denumerable. Then for each x EA, the set {x} E T. However, the union of all the
sets ix), where x E A, is equal to A, which does not belong to p.
Example 5.20.
The field 6 of all finite and cofinite subsets of an infinite set K is not a o-algebra. For, let A be an
infinite subset of K whose complement is also infinite. Then the union of all sets {x}, where xEA, is
infinite but not cofinite. This shows that we do not have a o-field. To see that 6 is not even a u-algebra,
observe that the same set E of all sets {z}, where x E A, cannot have a lub in 6. For, if C were such a
set, then x E A + {x} c C. Hence A c C, and so C would be infinite. Hence C must be cofinite, and
therefore C must intersect the complement A of A. If we choose y E Cn A, then C - (y} would be an
upper bound of E in 6, contradicting the assumption that C is the lub of E.
Solved Problems
LATTICES
5.1. In each of the following diagrams, a partial order -L of a set A is represented. For
which of them is (A, 6) a lattice ? A distributive lattice? A complemented lattice?
(4 (4
t
.d
(b) (4
I
??
??
??
? ?? d.&
? ??? ??
? ?? ‘b ??
??
? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ?
Solution:
(a) This is a distributive lattice with zero a and unit e, but it is not a complemented lattice. (For
example, there is no y corresponding to c such that c v y = e and c A y = a.)
(b) This is not a lattice. (For example, f and g have no lub.)
(c) This is a complemented lattice with zero a and unit e, but it is not distributive. (For example,
d A (b v c) = d, while (d A b) v (d A c) = b.)
(d) This is a lattice with zero a and unit f, but it is not complemented (c has no complement) and
not distributive ( d A (b v c) = d A e = d, while (d A b) v (d A c) = b v a = b.)
CHAP. 5j TOPICS IN THE THEORY OF BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS 155
5.2. Prove that any finite lattice has a zero element and a unit element.
Solution:
Let al, . . ..a. be the elements of the lattice, and let b = a, v . * * v a,. Then b is a unit.
For, oi 5 b for each i. Similarly, a, A * * . A a, is a zero.
5.3. (a) Given a set A totally ordered by a binary relation 4. Prove that (A, 4) is a dis-
tributive lattice. When is (A, 6) a complemented lattice?
(b) Give an example of a distributive lattice lacking both zero and unit elements.
Solution:
(a) For any z and y in A, either z 5 y or y f x. Then max (2, y), the larger of 2: and y, is
obviously the lub 2 v y, while min (5, y), the smaller of 2 and y, is the glb 2 A y. Thus (A, 6)
is a lattice. We must now prove the distributive law (L5) which becomes
min (z, max (y, 2)) = max (min (2, y), min (X,2))
First, max (y,z) 2 2 and max(y,z) 2 y. Hence min (x, max (y, z)) 5 min (2, z) and
min (2, max (y, z)) 2 min (2, y). Therefore min (5, max (y, z)) z max (min (x, y), min (x, 2)). Now
assume min (2, max(y, z)) > max (min (5, y), min (r, x)), and we shall derive a contradiction. It
follows from our assumption that x > max (min (x, y), min (x, 2)). Therefore z > min (z, y)
and x > min (x,2). Hence x > y and z > z. Consequently max (min (a, y), min (2,~)) =
max (y, z) and min (x, max (y, z)) = max (y, z), contradicting our assumption. The other dis-
tributive law (L6) must hold by virtue of Theorem 5.2.
For (A, 4) to be complemented, there would have to be a least element 0 and a greatest ele-
ment 1. Also, for any z in A, max (x, x’) = 1 and min (3c,x’) = 0. But either x = max (x,x’)
or 2 = min (x, z’). Hence x = 1 or 5 = 0. Therefore A would have to contain at most two
elements.
(b) By Part (a), such a lattice is given by (I, L), where Z is the set of all integers (positive,
zero, and negative) and f is the usual order relation on integers.
5.4. Show that lattices can be characterized by the six laws:

(a) xvy = yvx
commutative laws
(b) SAY = y/lx I
(c) 2 v (y v 2) = (xv y) v 2
associative laws
(d) xA(yAz) = (xAy)Ax
i
(e) zv (x~y) = 2
absorption laws
(f) x A (XV@ = 2 I
in the following sense: if (L, A, V) is a structure such that A and v are binary operation
on the set L satisfying the laws (a)-(f), and if we define xLy by xAy=z, then
(L, 4) is a lattice with lub ((x, y}) = x v y and glb ({x, y}) = x A y.
Solution:
We already know, by Theorem 6.1, that any lattice satisfies (a)-(f). Conversely, assume that
(L, r\,v) is a structure satisfying (a)-(f) and define x ‘y by SAY = x. Notice that zhy c*
xvy=y. (For, assume z 5 y, i.e. o A y = 2. Then by (e) and (b), y=yv(y~x)=yvx=
z v y. Conversely, if y = xv y, then, by (f), r = z A (z v y) = x A y, i.e. z e y.) Now,
0) 252, i.e. x~x=x. (For, by(f) and (e), X=ZA(ZV(ZA~))=XAX.)
(ii) (5 f y & y 5 2) + z f 2. (For, we are given x A y = x and y A z = y. Then x A z =

(X A 2/) A 2 = X A (g A 2) = x A 2/ = 2, i.e. X L 2.)
(iii) (x 4 y & y f 5) + x = y. (For, x = 5 A y = y AZ = y.) Thus f is a partial order on L.
(iv) z A y = glb ((5, y}). (For, (x A y) A z = x A y implies z A y L 2. Likewise, x A y f y. Thus

5 A y is a lower bound of {qy}. Assume z is any lower bound of {x,y}, i.e.
ZAX = Z & ZAY = 2
Then 2 A (x A y) = (2 A 2) A y = 2 A y = 2, i.e. 2 g x A y.)
(v) xv y = lub ({x, y}). This is proved in a manner similar to that of (iv).
Remark. Since (a) and (b), (c) and (d), and (e) and (f) are duals of each other, the result
we have just demonstrated yields a Duality Principle for lattices.
5.5. (a) Show that the following inequalities hold in any lattice.
(i) (XAY)V(XAX) L XA(Z/VX)
(ii) XV @AZ) L (XVY) A (XVz)
(b) Show that each of the following inequalities is a necessary and sufficient condi-
tion for a lattice to be distributive.
(iii) x A (y V 2) L (x A 2/) V (x A 2)
(iv) (XV y) A (XVX) L X V (y AZ)
(v) XA(yVx) h (xAl/)Vx
Solution:
(a) By duality, it suffices to prove (i). We have
XAY =? XA(yVZ) and XAZ L xA(yV2)
Hence (~A~)v(~Az)~xA(~vz).
(a) For (iii) we just use (i), and for (iv) we use (ii). For (v) we first assume distributivity. Then
xr\(yvz) f (x~y)v(x~~) 5 (x~y)v2
Conversely, let us assume that (v) holds. Since a A (b v c) 6 a, it follows by (v) that
UA(bVC) f UA((UAb)VC) = UA(CV(UAb))
f (a A c) v (a A b) by (v)
= (UAB) v (UAC)
Thus we have shown that (iii) holds and therefore that the lattice is distributive.
5.6. Prove that, in any lattice,

X&X + (XA’Il)vX L XA(yvX)
Solution:
Assume z f 5. Hence z f r A (y v z). Also, x A y f x A (y v z). Therefore
(XAy)V Z f X A (YVZ)
5.7. Let us call a lattice modular if and only if it obeys the following law:
262 + xA(yvx) 26 (x/\y)vx
CHAP. 5) TOPICS IN THE THEORY OF BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS 157
(a) Show that a lattice L is modular if and only if it obeys the law
X4X + (xA’lj)Vx = xA(z/Vx)
(b) Prove that distributivity implies modularity.

Solution:
(a) This follows immediately from Problem 5.6.
(b) This is a direct consequence of Problem 5.5(b(v)).
5.8. Determine which of the lattices appearing in Problems 5.1(c, d) and Example 5.2 are
modular.
Solution:
The lattice of Problem 5.1(c) is
This is not modular, since b f d and bv (c A d) # (b v c) ACL (Namely, b v (c A d) = bv a = b

and (bvc)Ad=eAd=d.)
The lattice of Problem 5.1(d) is
I
.e
/*<
by\./’
This is not modular since it contains the lattice of Problem 5.5(c) as a sublattice?, and we have just
seen that the latter is not modular.
The lattice of Example 5.2 is
A\
“VT’” ??
??
This lattice is modular. To see this, we must verify

ZfX -+ X A (2/V 2) E (Z A y) V 2
tBy a sublattice of a lattice (L, 5) we mean a lattice determined by a subset of L closed under A and V.
It is obvious that if z = 2, the result z A (y v x) f (x A y) v x is an immediate consequence of the

absorption laws. Therefore we may assume that z < x. It is obvious that this implies that z = 0
or x=1. But if z = 0 the inequality reduces to x A y f x r\y, and if x = 1 the inequality
reduces to y v z 5 ?dv z.
5.9. Show that a lattice is modular if and only if it satisfies the identity
@“(xVY)) V Y = (z”Y) A (x”Y)
Solution:
Assume L is modular. In the condition for modularity of Problem 5.7(a), substitute z for y,
y for z and x v y for x. The antecedent then becomes the true statement y f XV y, and we obtain
(2 A (X V Id) V Y = (XV Y) A (z V Y)
Conversely, assume that the indicated identity is true. Exchanging y and z, we obtain the
identity
(yA(xVZ))VZ = (yVZ)A(XvZ) (1)
Now, to prove modularity, we assume zfx and we have to prove that (~AX)VZ=XA(~VZ).
But since zfx, zvx=x. Hence the identity (I) becomes (y A 2) v z = (yv z) AX, which is
precisely what is required.
5.10. Prove that a lattice L is modular if and only if it does not contain a sublattice iso-
morphic to the lattice of Problem 5.1(c),
;i/\
b*,./‘c
Solution:
If L is modular, then L cannot contain such a sublattice, since the latter is not modular
(cf. Problem 5.8). Conversely, assume L is not modular. Then there exist elements x. y, z such
that 2 f z and z v (y A x) < (2 v y) A x. Now let a = y A 2, b = 2 v (y A x), c = y, d = (2 v y) A 2,
e=zvy. We leave it as an exercise for the reader to show that a, b, c, d and e are pairwise
distinct and that d A c = b A c = a, bvd=d, and cvd=cvb=e. This shows that L has
a sublattice isomorphic to the one in the diagram above.
5.11. (a) Show that in any lattice the following inequality holds.
(XAy) V (PAX) V @AX) 4 (XVY) A (YVZ) A (ZVX)
(b) Show that a lattice L is distributive if and only if the folIowing identity hoIds.
(XAY) V (VAX) V @Ax) = (XV& A (yV%) A (ZVX)
(c) Prove that a lattice is distributive if and only if it has no sublattice isomorphic
with either the lattice of Problem 5.1(c), Fig. 5-4 below, or the lattice of Example
5.2, Fig. 5-5 below.
Fig. 5-4 Fig. 5-5
Solution:
(a) From x~y~yvz and XAY &zvx, weinfer
SAY L (XVy)A(yVX)A(ZVx)
Similarly, we obtain yAZ L- (XVy)A(yVZ)A(ZVX)
and 2 A X f (XV y) A (y V 2) A (2 V 2)
Hence (X A y) V (3/A 2) V (2 A 5) L (Z V $/) A (y V 2) A (2 V 2)
(b) First, assume the lattice is distributive. Then

(XV& A (yV2) A (zVX) = ((xV~)A(~VZ)A~)V ((~V~)~(yvz)~x)
= ((X V Y) A 2) V ((Y V 2) A $1
= ((X A 2) V (Y A 2)) V ((II A 2) V (2 A $1
= (X A y) V (y A 2) V (2 A 5)
Conversely, assume the given identity holds. Now let us prove that the lattice is modular.
Assume x 5 z. Then
(xAy)V(yAZ)V(ZAX) = (XAy)V(yAZ)VX = XV(yA2)
and (XVy)A(yVZ)A(ZVx) = (XVy)A(yVZ)AZ = (XV2/)AZ
Thus we have shown modularity. Hence

z A (1/v 2) = x A (5 v y) A (Xv 2) A (v v 2) (by absorption)
= x A ((y A z) v (2 A x) v (z A y)) (by the assumed identity)
= [z A (y A z)] v ((z A x) v (x A y)) (by modularity and 2 k (2 A x) V (x A y))
= [X A (Y A z)] V [b A Y) V (X A z,]
= (x~y)V (XA~) (SinCe XA(yA2) e(xAy)V(XAZ))
Thus the lattice is distributive.
(c) Clearly, if a lattice is distributive it has no sublattices of either of the two indicated forms,
since the latter are both non-distributive (cf. Example 6.2 and Problem 5.8). Conversely,
assume the lattice non-distributive. If it is not modular, then the result follows by Problem
5.10. So we may assume modularity. By parts (a) and (b) of this problem, there exist ele-
ments x, II, z such that
(XAy)V(yAZ)V(ZAX) < (XVy)A(yVZ)A(ZVX)
I.&t 24 = (XA1/) V (yA2) V &AX),
V = (XVy) A (yV2) A (ZVX),
d = u V (5 A V) = (~‘4 2) A V,
b = UV(yAV) = (UVy) AV,
C = UV(ZAV) = (UVZ)AV.
We leave it as an exercise for the reader to show that v, d, b, c, u are all distinct and that
dhb=bAc=eAd=u and dvb=bvc=cvd=v.
ATOMS
5.12. In an atomic Boolean algebra ‘B, prove that every element x is the lub of the set k(z)
of all atoms b 6 x (but x is not the lub of any proper subset of k(x)).
Solution:
Clearly, z is an upper bound of q(x). Assume now that z is an upper bound of q(x) such that
x + z, and we shall obtain a contradiction. x $ z implies z A z’ # 0. Since % is atomic, there
is some atom b 6 5 A z’. Hence b f x, i.e. b E q(x). Also, b f 2’. But since z is an upper
bound of q(s), b f z. Therefore b f z A z’ = 0, contradicting the fact that b is an atom. Lastly,
assume z is the lub of WC*(x). Let b E ‘k(x) - W. Then for every cE W, c f x A b’ (since
c A (x A b’) = (c A x) A b’ = c A b’ = c, by properties (ii)-(iii), page 136, of atoms). Hence x A b’ is
an upper bound of W and therefore x 5 x A b’. But b 5 x. This implies b 5 b’ and therefore
b = 0, which is a contradiction.
5.13. (a) In an atomic Boolean algebra, show that 1 is the lub of the set of all atoms.
In particular, when the algebra has a finite number of atoms al, . . . , ak,
1 = al V ” ’ V ak.
(b) Prove that an atomic Boolean algebra is finite if and only if its set of atoms is
finite.
Solution :
(a) This is an immediate corollary of Problem 5.12. The additional remark follows from the fact
that alv “‘Vak is the lub of {a,, . . ..ok}.
(b) When an algebra is finite, then its set of atoms must be finite. Conversely, assume that there
are only finitely many atoms ai, . . ., ak. By Problem 5.12, every element 2 of the algebra is the
lub of all the atoms b 4 x, and therefore 2 is of the form ajl v . * . v aim where jr < * . * < j, f k.
But since there are only a finite number of joins of that form, there can be only a finite
number of elements in the algebra.
5.14. Show that any infinite Boolean algebra 9 contains an infinite set of pairwise-disjoint
elements.
Solution:
Case 1. Assume ‘E is atomic. Then ‘3 has infinitely many atoms, by Problem 5.13(b). If 2
and 2/ are distinct atoms, then XA g = 0 (by property (ii) of atoms).
Case 2. ‘3 is not atomic. Then there is an element xo # 0 such that x,, contains no atom.
Hence there is some z1 such that 0 < x1 < x0. Similarly, there is some x2 such that 0 < xs < xi.
Proceeding in this manner, we obtain (using the axiom of choice) an infinite sequence x0, xi, x2, . . .
suchthat z,,>z,>z,>.*.. Let ~o=xo-~~,yl=x~-x~,~~=x~-x~, . . . . Then 2/ir\yj=O
w.henever i # j.
5.15. Exhibit a Boolean algebra which is not isomorphic to any Boolean algebra of the
form T(A).
Solution:
Consider the Boolean algebra 4B of statement bundles, based upon the propositional calculus
(cf. Example 3.5). “B is denumerable. For, since there are denumerably many statement forms,
there can only be a countable number of statement bundles. However, distinct statement letters
determine distinct statement bundles, since distinct statement letters are not logically equivalent.
Hence there are denumerably many statement bundles. Assume % is isomorphic to some F(A).
Then A must be infinite, for otherwise ‘P(A) would be finite and so would S. Thus T(A) is
denumerable (since it is isomorphic with %) and A is infinite. By Cantor’s Theorem (Problem 2.22),
A must have smaller cardinality than T(A). A is equinumerous with a subset of T(A), and there-
fore A must be denumerable. But then A would be equinumerous with T(A) (since both are denum-
erable), contradicting Cantor’s Theorem. (What we have shown, by means of Cantor’s Theorem,
is that no denumerable Boolean algebra can be isomorphic with any T(A), and we also exhibited
a particular denumerable Boolean algebra.)
:i
I
i
5.16. Show that the Boolean algebra % of statement bundles (cf. Example 3.5) is atomless.
Solution:
Assume [A] is an atom. Then [A] # O,, and A cannot be a contradiction. Let Ai be any
statement letter not occurring in A. Then A does not logically imply Aip for we can assign Ai
the value F and assign the statement letters in A suitable values so that A is T. In addition,
Ai 8zA is not a contradiction, since we can make Ai T and, at the same time, make A T. Also, Ai & A
logically implies A. Thus 0, < [Ai & A] < [A], contradicting the assumption that [A] is an atom.
This problem provides another way of solving Problem 6.15, since any Boolean algebra T’(A)
is atomic.
SYMMETRIC DIFFERENCE. BOOLEAN RINGS.

5.17. In any Boolean algebra, prove
(a) x + y = (x vy) A (XAY)’
(b) x + (xvy) = x’ A y
(c) y + (x A y) = x’ A y
(d) x V ‘$j = x + y + (x A y).
Solution:
(a) (XV y) A (X A $4)’ = (XV y) A (X’ V y’)
= (X A 2’) V (X A y’) V (2/A X’) V (v A y’)
= (X A g’) V (X’A 76) = X + y
(b) 2 f (X v Y) = (XV (xv Y)) A (X A (xv Y))’ (by (a))
= (xv y) * 2’ = (X A X’) V ($/ A X’) = ‘Jj A 2’ = X’ A 2/
(C) Y + (X A Y) = (Y V (X A Y)) A (Y A (X A Y))’ 0-v (a))
= y A (X A y)’ = y A (X’v 9’) = (VAX’) V (y A y’) = 2’ A ‘j/
(d) (x +Y) + (xv Y) = Y + (x + (xv Y)) = Y -t @‘A Y) (by (a))
= 2” A y (by (c))
= XAlLj
Thus (x + y) + (xv y) = x A y. Hence xv g = x -f-y -t (z A y), by Theorem 5.9(i).
5.18. Given a Boolean algebra % = (B, A, v, ‘, 0, l), we have seen that % determines a
Boolean ring with unit r(9) = (B, +, A, 0). Theorem 5.11 tell us that, starting with
a Boolean ring T = (R, +, X, 0) with unit element 1 # 0, and defining x’ = 1 +x,
x A y = x x y, and XV y = x + y + (x X y), we obtain a Boolean algebra
WY) = @, *, VP‘t Cl)
Show that these transformations are inverses of each other in the sense that
b(r(48)) = 48 and r(b(!Q) = %.
Solution:
Start with a Boolean algebra % = (B, As, vs, ‘%, 0% , 1,). Then r(3) = (B, SFB,A~, 0, ) with
unit element 1,. Let C = b(r(9)). By definition of C,
2% = 1, +I( z = z’s (by Theorem 5.9(h))
2 AC Y = XAgy
XVc $j = Xi-% y+, (XAsy) = XV% j/ (by Problem 6.17(d))

Thus b(r@)) = 55.
NOW let US start with a Boolean ring ?K = (E, -i-%.’Xx., 0%) with unit element 1% # 0%.
Then in ‘D = b(T),
2’1, = l+Tz
XAQY = Xx~u
xv,y = x+KY+5y(xxqY)
Let d = T(D) = r@(T)).
x +d y = (a Am Y’Do)VTJ (X”= A?, Y)

= (x XT (1 +x Y)) vn ((1 +t 4 XK Y)
= [x xx (1 +T y,] +x [(l +“R. x) xx Y] +1( [(x xq (1 +q Y)) xq ((1 +T 2) xq 2/)1
= [x+x (x XK y)] +T [Y +T (x XT y,] +Ip (5 xx y x$.y (1 +T 4 xx (1 +*Y))
= x+x Y+T [(x+(y) xK(l+q(x+TY+K (XXq(Y))]
= x+~y++q(xx~Y)+~xx~(zx~Y)+q Yx~(“x~Y)+~(xx5yYP
= xfq y+1((xx~Y)+~(~x~Y)+~((“xqY)+~(~x~Y)
= x+Ky
Also, Xx,y= XAqY==x~Y. Thus r(b(4)) = 9.
5.19. Solutions of Equations.

(a) Show that any equation 7 = a is equivalent to an equation of the form p = 0.
(b) Show that a finite system of equations 71 = 0, . . . , 711.
= 0 is equivalent to a single
equation (T= 0.
(c) Find necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of a solution u of an
equation 7(u, us, . . . , ur) = 0, and, when there is a solution, find them all.
(d) Show that T(U,UI, . . ., ?.&k)
= 0 has a unique solution in u if and only if T = u + p,
where p does not contain u.
Solution:
(a) 7 = o if and only if (T Au’) v (T’A U) = 0, by Theorem 5.9(j).
(b) .rl = 0 & . . . &7,=0 t) T1V’*‘VT,=o.
(c) Write 7 in disjunctive normal form. Grouping those terms involving u and those involving u’,
we obtain
7 = (UA 01) V (U’ A 02)
Hence T = 0 f) (U A U1) V (U’ A “2) = 0
f* UAq=O & U’AU2=0
* u-u; 82 02~24
t) u2~ufu;
Hence there is a solution if and only if 0s f u;, and the solutions are all u such that
02 f u f u;. Hence the set of solutions consists of all (ue v w) A u;, for all values of w. (For, if
02 2-zu 4 o;, then (Q v u) A ui = u A U; = u. Conversely, if us f ui, then, for any W, 02 f
(es v w) A ei 5 vi.) If we wish to solve for the remaining variables, we then solve the inequality
ue f ei, which is equivalent to the equality ue A 01 = 0.
(d) By (c), if there is a unique solution, ut = ui. (Otherwise, u2 and U; would be distinct solutions.)
Hence
7= (U A 01) V (U’ A 0;) = U + U; = U + (1 + “1)
Conversely, if 7 = u + p, then 7 = 0 + u = p.
5.20. Find necessary and sufficient conditions for existence of a solution and find all
solutions of the following equations.
(a) uvx = w, (b) UAX = UAW.
Solution:
(4 uvz=w f) [(U V 2) A W’] V [(U V 2)’ A W] = 0
f) (U A W’) V (2 A W’) V (U’ A 2’ A W) = 0
c) (UAW’) v (UAZAW’) v (U’AXAW’) v (U’AZ’AW) = 0
c, (UA[W’V(ZAW’)])V (U’A[(ZAW’)V(Z’AW)]) = 0
e (U A W’ ) V (U’A(Z+W)) = 0
w
01 Q2
A solution exists f) u2 f ui
t) z$wfw
ti (Z+W)AW’ = 0
c, (ZAW’) + (WAW’) = 0
t* ZAW’=O
When zA W’ = 0, all solutions are of the form ((x + w) v x) A w for arbitrary x. But
[(Z+W)AW] V [XAW] = (WAZ’) V (XAW) = WA (XVZ’)
The equation z A w’ = 0 always has solutions z and the solutions are all elements g A w
for arbitrary y. Thus

2 = YAW
U = W A (XV 2’) = W A (5 V (y A W)‘) = W A (XV $j’ V W’)
= w A (XV y’) for arbitrary x, y and w
(b) UAZ=UAW ‘3 [(U A 2) A (U A W)‘] V [(U A W) A (U A Z)‘] = 0
f) [(U A 2) A (U’ V W’)] V [(U A W) A (U’ V Z’)] = 0
t) (UAXAW’)V (UAWAZ’) = 0
t) U A [@A W’) V (WA Z’)] = 0
-3 uA(w+x) = 0
A solution exists if and only if 0 4 (w + 2)‘. Hence a solution always exists. The solutions
are u = 5 A (w + 2)’ for all 2, w, 2.
5.21. Find all solutions of the system

u = (xAw’)V~ (4
2 L (2,Aw)Vu (b)
1 wvv = x’vu (c)
Solution:
(a) is equivalent to
(U A [(Z’ VW) A V’]) V (24’ A [(Z A W’)” V]) = 0 (a’)
(b) is equivalent to
2 A [(V’V W’) AU’] = 0 @‘I
(c) is equivalent to
[(WVW)AZAU’] v [w’A~A(z’vU)] = 0 (c’)
Hence we must solve the system (a’), (b’), (c’). By Problem 5.19(b), this system is equivalent
to the single equation
(24A [(z’v w) A v’]) v (u’ A [(z A w’) v v]) v (2 A [(v’v w’) AU’])
V [(WV V) A X A U’] V [W’ A W’ A (2’ V U)] = 0
(U A ([(Z’ V W) A ‘II’] V [W’ A W’]}) v (U’ A {[(Z A W’) v V]
V [ZA (V’VW’)] V [(WV?J)AX] v [W’AV’AZ’])) = 0
Hence c1 is [(z’v w) A v’] v [w’ A 0’1, and us is
[(Z A W’) V V] V [Z A (V’ V W’)] V [(W V V) A Z] V [W’ A 2)’ A Z’]
By easy calculation, us = v v z v w’ and or = vu’. Hence a solution exists if and only if

ZIv z v w’ f v. But the latter equation is equivalent to v’ A (zv w’) = 0. By Problem 5.20(b),
substituting v’ for u, z v w’ for z, and 0 for w, we obtain the solution v’ = x A (x v w’)’ = x A (x’ A w),
i.e. v=x’vzvw’. The solution for u is u = (us v y) A U; = (v v z v w’v y) A v = v. Thus the
solutions are u = v = x’ v xv w’ for arbitrary x, z, w.
AXIOMATIZATIONS
5.22. In our axiom system for Boolean algebra (cf. Section 3.2), prove the independence of
each of Axioms (l)-(4) and (7)-(g). Show that each of Axioms (5)-(6) is not independent.
(A member A of a system 2jI of axioms is said to be independent if and only if A
is not provable from the set W u {A} of the other axioms.)
Solution :
Axiom (1): z v y = yv x. Define a model ((0, l), A,V,
A,v, ‘, 0,l) as follows:
Complement: 0’ = 1, 1’ = 0.
Join:
In the above table, the value of xv 2/ is to be found at the intersection of the row to the right
of x and the column under y. Thus
ovo = 0, Ovl= 0, Iv0 = 1, Iv1 = 1
Meet:
Thus OAO
OAO =
= 0,
0, Olzl= 0, 1AO = 0, l/71=
IAl = 0
0
Then Axioms (2)-(g) hold, but Axiom (1) is false. (1) fails because 1 v 0 = 1 # 0 = 0 v 1. To see
that Axiom (2), z A Ay = y AA 2, holds, observe that all meets are 0. Verification of the other axioms
is left as an exercise for the reader.
For the independence of Axiom (2), use 0’ = 1, 1’ = 0, and the operations

For the independence of Axiom (3), x A (y v z) = (z A y) v (Z A z), use 0’ = 1, 1’ = 0, and
V 0 1 A 0 1
0 0 1 0 1 0
l- 1 1 1 l- 1 0 1
Note that 0 A (0 v 1) = 0 A 1 = 0, but (0 A 0) v (0 A 1) = 1 v 0 = 1.
For the independence of Axiom (4), xv (y A z) = (xv y) A (xv z), use 0’ = 1, 1’ = 0, and
V 0 1 A 0 1
0 0 1 0 0 0
t 1 1 0 I- 1 0 1
For the independence of Axiom (‘7), xv x’ = 0, let the domain of the model be F(A), where
A is any non-empty set, take A to be fl, and v to be U. Let 0 be @ and let 1 be A. However, let
2’ = 0 for all x.
For the independence of Axiom (8), use the same model as for Axiom (7), except that
x’ = A = 1 for all x.
For the independence of Axiom (9), use the model (81, with A, v, ’ as n, U, and - (Q)n@ =
pug=e,=$g; O=l=@
To show that Axiom (5), xv 0 = x, is provable from the rest, note first that xv 1 = 1 for
all x. For,
1 = XVX’ = X V (2’ A 1) = (XV X’) A (XV 1) = 1 A (XV 1) = X V 1
Hence X V 0 = X V (X AX’) = (X A 1) V (X A X’) = X A (IV X’) = 2 A 1 = X
To show that Axiom (6), z A 1 = x, follows from the rest, “dualize” the proof just given for
the axiom xv 0 = x. Thus, first, x A 0 = 0 for all x. For,
0 = XAX’ = X A (X’V 0) = (X A 2’) V (X A 0) = 0 V (X A 0) = X A 0
Hence X A 1 = X A (XV 2’) = (XV 0) A (XV X’) = X V (0 A 2) = X V 0 = X
Detailed verification that the examples in the independence proofs satisfy the remaining axioms
is left to the reader,
IDEALS
5.23. If C is a subset of a Boolean algebra CBand if an ideal J contains C and is contained
in every ideal containing C, show that J is the ideal Gen (C) generated by C.
Solution:
We have to show that J is equal to the intersection H of all ideals containing C. Since J is
contained in every ideal containing C, it follows that J c H. On the other hand, since J is itself
an ideal containing C, H C_J. Therefore, J = H.
5.24. If J is an ideal of a Boolean algebra % and @ E B, prove that Gen (JU {y}) is a proper
ideal if and only if Y’4 J.
Solution:
Assume y’E J. Hence 1 = y v y’ E Gen (JU {y}), and therefore Gen (Ju {y}) is not a proper
ideal. Conversely, assume that Gen (Ju{y}) is not a proper ideal. Then 1 E Gen (JU {y}), and
by Theorem 5.17 there exist z E B and z E J such that 1 = (z A g) v X. Hence
g” = y’ A 1 = 1/’ A ((2 Ay) V 2) = (y’ A (2 Au)) V ($/A 2) = y’ A 2
But since z E J, y’ A x E J and therefore y’ E J.

5.25. By a congruence relation R on a Boolean algebra 23 we mean a binary relation R on B

satisfying the following properties.
(a) xRx (reflexivity)
(b) xRy --f yRx (symmetry)
(c) (zRy & yRx) + xRx (transitivity)
(d) xRy --, (x’Ry’ & (x A x)R(y A 2)).
Define JR = {x : xR0). Prove: (i) JR is an ideal. (ii) JR is a proper ideal if and

only if 1 (ORl). (iii) x =J~ y if and only if xRy.
Solution:
(9 BY (4, 0 E JR. Assume x E J, and y E J,. Hence xR0 and yR0. By (d) x’R1, and, again by
(4, (2’ A Y’WY’. But from (d), yR0 implies y’R1. Hence by (c), (2’ A y’)Rl, and, again by (d),
(x’ A y’
)‘Ro, i.e. x v y E JR. Now assume that x E JR and zE B. Then xR0 and, by (d),
(x A x)RO, i.e. x A x E JR.
(ii) This follows immediately from the fact that an ideal is proper if and only if it does not
contain 1.
(iii) Since + is definable in terms of the meet and complement, it follows by (d) that xRy +
(x + y)R(y + y), i.e. xRy + (z + y)RO. But (x + y)RO is equivalent to x + y E JR, which in
turn is equivalent by definition to x ‘J, y.
5.26. A subset F of a Boolean algebra 23 is said to be a filter if and only if: (i) F is non-
empty; (ii) (x E F & y E F) +xA~EF’; (iii)xEF&yEB+xvyEF. Byanultra-
filter we mean a proper filter which is contained in no other proper filter. Prove:
(a) F is a filter if and only if F’ = {x’ : x E F) is an ideal.
(b) F is an ultrafilter if and only if F’ is a maximal ideal.
(c) Assumption (iii) in the definition of filter may be replaced by
(iii’) x E F & x g y + y E F
Solution:
(a) Assume F is a filter. Given x E F’, y E F’, z E B. Then x’E F and y’ E F. Hence x’ A y’ E F
and X’VZ’E F. Therefore xv y = (x’ A y’)’ E F’ and x A z = (z’v 2’)’ E F’. Thus F’ is
an ideal. The converse is left as an exercise for the reader.
(b) This is an immediate consequence of (cc).
(c) The equivalence between (iii) and (iii’) follows from the equivalence between x f y and
xvy=y.
5.27. Call a Boolean algebra 3 sim$e if and only if (0) is the only proper ideal. Prove
that 3 is simple if and only if B = (0, l}.
Solution:
Clearly, if B = (0, l}, then (0) is the only proper ideal. Conversely, assume B is simple. Let
z be any element of B different from 1. Then the principal ideal J, is a proper ideal, since 1 =# X.
Since 9 is simple, J, = (0). But x E J, and therefore x = 0, i.e. B = (0, 1).
5.28. In a Boolean algebra %, a set C of ideals of % is said to be an C-chain of ideals if and

only if, for any J1 and Jz in C, either J1 c Jz or J2 C_JL (This amounts to saying that
the relation c totally orders C.) Prove that the union of an c-chain of ideals is
again an ideal, and, if each ideal in C is proper, so is the union.
Solution:
Let H = U J, where C is an c-chain of ideals. Given x and y in H, and z in B. Then
JEC
XE J, and y E J, for some J, and J, in C. Since C is an C-chain, either J1 L J, or J, c J,, say,
J, c_J,. Hence x E J, and y E J,. Since J, is an ideal, xv y E J2 and x A x E J,. But since J, c H,
we obtain: xv y E H and x A z E H. Hence H is an ideal. If each ideal in C is proper, then 14J
for each J in C. Hence 14 H and therefore H is also proper.
5.29. If T = (R, +, X, 0) is a commutative ring, then a non-empty subset J of R is called

a ring-theoretic ideal if and only if
(i) (xEJ & yEJ) + x-y EJ;
(ii) (x E J & x E R) + x: x x E J.
Prove that if J is a subset of a Boolean algebra 3 = (B, A, V, ‘, 0, l), and T =

(B, +, A, 0) is the corresponding Boolean ring, then J is an ideal of 48 if and only if
J is a ring-theoretic ideal of T.
Solution:
Notice that, for Boolean rings, (-y) = y, and therefore we may replace x-y in condition (i)
by z + y. Now assume that J is an ideal in %. Wealreadyknowthat (zEJ&yEJ) +s+yEJ,
which is condition (i), while condition (ii) reads (xEJ & zE B) + x A z E J, which is part of the
definition of an ideal. Conversely, assume that J is a ring-theoretic ideal. By (ii), (x E J & x E B) +
XAZEJ. Nowitremainstoshowthat (xEJ&yEJ)-+xvyEJ. SoassumexEJ&yEJ. By
(ii), x A y E J, and, since x v y = x + y + (x A y), we may conclude by (i) that 2 v y E J.
5.30. Show that, if J is an ideal of a Boolean algebra 48, then x =J y if and only if there
exists some element x in J such that x v x = y v x.
Solution:
Assume x zJ y, i.e. x + y E J. Let z = z + y. Then
xv2 = xv(x+y) = xvy = yv(x+y) = yvz
Conversely, assume x v z = y v x for some z in J. Then

xfly’ f (xv 2) A y’ = (y v 2) A y’ = 2 A y’ f 2
Hence XA~’ E J. Also,

2’ A y f X’ A (y V 2) = 2’ A (XV 2) = X’ A 2 5 2
Hence x’ A y E J. Therefore x-l-y = (x A y’) v (x’ A y) E J.
QUOTIENT ALGEBRAS
5.31. Let 48 be the Boolean algebra T(A), where A is some infinite non-empty set, and let
J be the ideal of finite subsets of A. Prove that the quotient algebra WJ is atomless.
Solution:
Given an element [Xj of WJ such that [X] # [O]. Hence X is infinite. Then there is an
infinite set Y such that Y c X and X - Y is infinite. (To see this, enumerate a subset of
x, Ia,, a,, . . .I, and let Y = {a,, as, a,, . . .}.) Since Y is infinite, [Y] # 09,J. Also, since Y cX,
[Y] 5 [Xl. However, since X - Y is infinite, X + Y 4 J, i.e. X +J Y. Hence [X] # [Y]. Thus
093/J < VI < [Xl, and therefore [Xj cannot be an atom.
5.32. Given Boolean algebras & = (A, A&, v~, ‘~4, O,, loA) and 9 = (B, A%, vs, ‘q, 0,, 1%).
A function f from A into B is called a homomorphism from CA into 9 if and only if
(i) fW-4) = (f(x))‘* ;

(ii) f(xAdY) = f(x) As f(y).
If such a function has its range equal to all of B, then it is called a homomorphism
from W¶ onto 48, and 9 is called a homomorphic image of CA. A homomorphism f is
an isomorphism of CA into ?t? if and only if f is one-one, and f is called an isomorphism
of ~4 onto CBif and only if f is an isomorphism of CA into ‘B and the range of f is B.
We say that CA and 553are isomorphic if and only if there is an isomorphism of CA
onto %. If f is any function from A into B, by the kernel Kf we mean the set
{x : x E A & f(x) = O,}. Prove:
(a) If f is a homomorphism from CA into %, then
(1) f&V&Y) = f(x) vql f(y);

(2) f(x+oAy) = f(x) +ef(Y);
(3) f(O,) = 0% and f(1,) = 1%.
(b) If f is a homomorphism from CA into %, the range f(A) determines a subalgebra

of 9.
(c) If f is a homomorphism from CA into %, and C determines a subalgebra of ‘73,then
f-‘(C) = {x: it: E A & f(x) E C} determines a subalgebra of CA.
(d) The identity mapping IA is an isomorphism from CA onto CA. (Hence the relation
“isomorphic” is reflexive.)
(e) If f is an isomorphism from CA onto %, then the inverse function f-l from B onto
A is an isomorphism from % onto 4. (Hence the relation “isomorphic” is
symmetric.)
(f) If f is a homomorphism from CV~into %, and g is a homomorphism from CBinto an
algebra C = (C, A~, vc, ‘c, O,, l,), then the composition g 0 f is a homomorphism
from CA into C. In particular, if f and g are isomorphisms onto, then so is g 0 f.
(Hence the relation “isomorphic” is transitive.)
(g) A homomorphism f from CA into 48 is an isomorphism of CA into 9 if and only
if the kernel Kf = (0,).
(h) If J is an ideal of CA, then the function f(x) = x + J for all x in A is a homomor-
phism from CA onto CA/J (called the natural homomorphism from & onto CA/J).
(i) If 48 is a homomorphic image of CA, then there is an ideal J of CA such that 4B and
CAIJ are isomorphic.
Solution:
(4 fb v&.q Y) = f((X’d A\w4 y’d)‘=‘f)
= (f(X’w4 A 04 Y’d))‘“B = (fb’d A% f(Y’=d)‘g
= (f(X)‘% As f(Y)‘%)‘% = f(X) vq~ f(Y)
The proof for + is similar, since + is definable in terms of A, V, ‘. Now
f(0,) = f(X A& 5’4) = f(X) A\“B f(X’&) = f(X) “\II f(X)‘% = 023
Hence f(ld) = f(Oy) = f(Od)‘s = 02 = 1%.

(5) From now on we shall omit subscripts CA and 9, wherever this is not likely to cause confusion.
Assume now that j is a homomorphism from CA into ‘K Assume u, w E f(A). Then u = j(z)
and w = j(y) for some x, y in A. Hence u A v = j(x) A j(y) = j(x A y) E j(A). Similarly,
u’ = j(x)’ = j(x’) E f(A). Hence f(A) determines a subalgebra of CB.
(c) Assume x, y E j-r(C). Then j(x A y) = j(x) A j(y) E C, since C is closed under A. Similarly,
f(x’) = j(x)‘E C, since C is closed under complementation. Thus x A y E f-r(C) and x’E j-r(C).
(~2) This is obvious.
(e) Given u, v E B. Then
j(j-‘(U A W)) = U A 2, = j(j-‘(U)) Aj(f-‘(V)) = j(j-‘(U) A j-‘(V))
Since j is one-one, j-‘(UA V) = j-l(u) A j-r(v). Similarly, f(j-‘(u’)) = u’ = (jj-r(u))’ =

j((j-l(u))‘). Since j is one-one, j-‘(24’) = (j-l(u))‘. ‘
(f) (L7Of)(X A Y) = dfh A Y)) = df(X) A f(Y))
= &f(X)) A &f(Y)) = (!J of)(X) A (g Of)(Y)
Similarly, (l7 ofw) = f7W’)) = W(x)‘) = bM4))’ = ((f7 of)b)Y
(9) Assume j is one-one, and let x E Kp Then j(x) = 0 = j(0). Since j is one-one, z = 0. Con-
versely, assume Kf = {0}, and assume j(x) = j(y). Then j(x + y) = j(x) + j(y) = j(z) + j(z) = 0.
Thus x + y E Kf, but, since Kf = {0}, x + y = 0, which is equivalent to x = y.
(h) f(XA Y) = (X A Y) + J = [X “Y] = [Xl A [Y] = f(X) A f(V)
Similarly, j(x’) = 2’ + J = [x’] = [xl’ = j(x)’
(i) Assume j is a homomorphism from & onto 9. Let J = Kp J is an ideal. (For, if x, y E J

and z E A, then j(x v y) = j(x) v j(y) = 0 v 0 = 0, and j( x A Z) = j(x) A j(2) = 0 A j(2) = 0.) For
any 2 in A, we define F([x]) = j(x). This definition is independent of the choice of the particu-
lar representative 2 in [z], since
x+ y E J --) j(x + y) = 0 --f f(x) + f(Y) = 0 + f(x) = f(Y)
Now 8%
F([X] A [W], = F([X A W], = f(XA W) = f(X) A f(w) = F([X]) A F([W])
,:
/
Similarly, F([x]‘) = F([x’]) = j(x’) = j(x)’ = F([x])’
To see that F is one-one, we check that the kernel of F is (0). Assume F([x]) = 0. Then
j(x) = 0. Hence x E Kf, and therefore [x] = 0. That the range of F is B follows from the
fact that the range of j is B.
5.33. (a) Let b be a nonzero element of a Boolean algebra 23. Let Bt, denote {x : z 4 b}.
Define u# = b -u for every u in BL,. Then show that (Bt,, A, v, #, 0, b) is a
Boolean algebra (denoted 3 1b).
(b) Let b be a nonzero element of a Boolean algebra FB. Let J be the principal ideal
JV generated by b’, i.e. J = {x : x 6 b’}. Define 4(u) = [u] = u + J for every
u 4 b. Prove that + is an isomorphism of 23 1b onto WJ.
Solution:
(a) Since the operations A, v and # are closed in B,, Axioms (l)-(4) are automatically satisfied.
Axioms (5) and (9) are obvious. Axiom (6) becomes z A b = z which holds for all z in Bb.
Axiom (7) reads z v (b - x) = b for all x in Bb, which is obvious. Finally, Axiom (8) becomes
z A (b - x) = 0 which holds for all 2.
(b)
Since b+l=b’EJ, wehave b+J=[l]. Hence
+(x#) = C(b - 2) = +(b~ 2’) = [b] A [cc’] = [l] A [z]’ = [xl’ = (&))’
Thus + is a homomorphism. To see that @ is one-one, assume that u is in the kernel K+. Then
[u] = 0 IIjJ = J, i.e. UE J. Hence u 5 b’. But u f b. Therefore u = 0. Hence K = {0},
and + is one-one. Assume now that [v] E B/J. Let u = u A b. Then [u] = [w] A [b] =
[w] A [l] = [w], and u E % ] b. Hence [v] is in the range of $. Therefore + is an isomorphism
of 4B/ b onto WJ.
BOOLEAN REPRESENTATION THEOREM

5.34. Show that every proper ideal J of a Boolean algebra 9 is equal to the intersection
H of all maximal ideals containing it.
Solution:
By Theorem 5.26, there is a maximal ideal containing J. Now J C H. We must show that
H G J. Assume x 4 J. Then by Problem 5.24, Gen (J U {z’}) is a proper ideal. Hence by Theorem
5.26 there is a maximal ideal M containing Gen (J U (2’)). Therefore J c M and 5 B M. Thus z 4 H.
Hence H c J.
5.35. (For those readers acquainted with elementary point-set topology.) Definitions: A
clopen set of a topological space is a set which is both closed and open. A topological
space X is totally disconnected if and only if, for any distinct points x and y of X,
there exists a clopen set C such that x EC and y 4 C. A topological space which is
both compact and totally disconnected is called a Boolean space.
(a) Prove that the clopen subsets of a Boolean space X form a field of sets (called the
dual algebra Bx).
(b) Let x be the set of maximal ideals of a Boolean algebra 9. For any x in B, let
E(x) = {M : M E zw & x 4 M}. Then if we take arbitrary unions of sets of the
form E(x) to be open sets, show that 3M becomes a Boolean space (called the
Stone space of CB). Prove also that the sets E(x) are the clopen subsets of 3M, and
that the dual algebra B, is isomorphic with the original Boolean algebra 9.
(c) If X is a Boolean space, prove that the Stone space 3M of the dual algebra BX is
homeomorphic with the original space X.
Solution:
(a) The complement of an open space is closed and vice versa. Hence the complement of a clopen
set is clopen. In addition, the union and intersection of a finite number of closed (open) sets
are also closed (open).
(b) Any maximal ideal is a proper ideal and therefore belongs to 2(z) for some 2. Now assume
that MI and M, are distinct maximal ideals. Then
- there must be some element z E MI - MP.
Hence M, E E(z’) and M, E E(z). Since g(z’) = E(z), &V is a totally disconnected space. To
prove compactness, assume &f is covered by some collection {O,}, e A of open sets, i.e.
CM= u 0,. Let us assume JM is not covered by any finite subset of the collection {O,), e A,
CZEA
and let us show that this leads to a contradiction. Replace each 0, by the sets E(o) contained
in it. Hence we obtain a covering of &V by a collection U of sets of the form E(s), where x
ranges over some set C C B. It follows that no finite subset of lJ covers iu. (Otherwise,
replacing each 5(z) by a corresponding 0, containing it, we would obtain a finite covering of
&f by Ool’s.) Hence E(z,) v * . . v _C(z,) # &!z for any x1, . . ., zk in C. But -C(xl) v . . . v +?Z(r,)-=
E(xlv ... v xk) (by the proof of Theorem 5.30). Hence X(zi v . . . v xk) f d1 for any zl, . , zk
inc. Therefore x,v...vx,#l forahyx,,...,x,inC. By Theorem 5.16 the ideal Gen (C)
generated by C is a proper ideal, and therefore by Theorem 5.26 there is a maximal ideal M
containing C. Hence for every x in C, M 4 Z(z). This contradicts the fact that the set CJ~ of
all maximal ideals is covered by the collection U of open sets. Hence the space ~jlf is compact.
By definition, each E(x) is open, and, since E(X) = E(z’), each ~(2) is also closed. Con-
versely, assume that g is a clopen subset of c%‘. Since 9 is closed and ,T[ is compact, (1~
is itself compact. Since q is open, ‘JJ is a union of sets of the form T(x) and therefore, by
ComPactness, qj is a union of a finite number of such sets: s(xi), . , E(r,,). But
E(xJ v . *. v E(x,) = E(x, v . . . v Xm)

i.e. (y is of the form X(y).
The isomorphism between the dual algebra B ej~ and ‘B already has been established in the
proof of Theorem 5.30.
(c) Given a Boolean space X. For each x in X, let G(z) be the set of all clopen sets A in the dual
algebra 2x such that x @A. Let us show that G(x) is a maximal ideal in B,. If A, and A,
are in G(x), then x4-4, and x4A,, and therefore z & A,uA,, i.e. A,uA,,E G(x). If, in addi-.
tion, A, E B,, then x 4 A,nA,, i.e. A, nA, E G(x). Thus G(x) is an ideal. Clearly, for any
clopen set A, either x 4 A or x 4 X - A. Hence G(x) is maximal. Thus G is a function from
X into the Stone space a of the dual algebra B,. To see that G is one-one, observe that if
1: and y are distinct points of X, then since X is totally disconnected, there is a clopen set
containing x but not y, and therefore G(x) # G(y). To see that the range of G is all of -Jl,
assume M is any maximal ideal in the field of clopen sets and assume for the sake of contra-
diction that M # G(x) for all x E X.
Case 1. For each x in X, there is a clopen set A in M - G(x). Hence x E A. Thus the
sets of M form a covering of X, and by compactness there must be finitely many sets of M
whose union is X. But the union of a finite number of sets in an ideal must again be in the
ideal. Therefore the unit element X of the field of clopen sets would have to be in M, and
M would not be a proper ideal, contradicting the definition of maximal ideal.
Case 2. There is some element x in X such that there is no clopen set in M - G(.y) but
there is a clopen set A in G(z) -M. So A 4M, and therefore the clopcn set X-A E M,
since M is maximal. Since there is no clopen set in M - G(x), X - A 6 G(z). Hence both A
and X-A are in G(x), which is impossible.
It remains to show that G is continuous. (That G-1 is also continuous then follows from
the fact that ~11 and X are compact Hausdorff spaces.) Let z E X. Since the open sets of ~77
are unions of clopen sets of the form E(A), where A is some clopen set of X, it suffices to con-
sider any clopen set %(A) having G(x) as a member. We must show that there is some open
set Y containing x as a member such that G[Y] c E(A). Since E(A) is the set of all maximal
ideals of the dual algebra not containing the clopen set A, it follows from the fact that
G(z) E E(A) that EEA. Then A is an open set such that x EA and, for any y in A, G(y) E E:(A).
Hence G is continuous.
INFINITE MEETS AND JOINS

5.36. Prove that a Boolean algebra CBis isomorphic to a Boolean algebra T(A) of all subsets
of some non-empty set A if and only if % is complete and atomic.
Solution :
We already know that any Boolean algebra T(A) is atomic and complete. Conversely, assume
that 9 is atomic and complete, and let A be the set of atoms of %. For any element x in B, let
q(x) = {b : b E A & b g x}. By Theorem 5.7, * is an isomorphism of ‘5 into T(A). Let C E T(A),
i.e. CcA. By the completeness of ‘B, C has a lub x. Hence by Problem 5.12, C = q(r). Thus *
is an isomorphism of CBonto T(A).
5.37. Associativity of Meets and Joins. If for each w in a set W, X, is a set of elements
of a given Boolean algebra CB,and X = ~ VW X,, prove:
(a) ,Yw (2x U) = 2x u
tb) w?w (.PxWa0u, = ,?x”
in the sense that, if the left-hand sides exist, then so do the right-hand sides and they
are equal.
Solution :
Let z = V V u . Assume xEX. Then x~X, for some vE W. Hence x f

( u E x,
WEW >
V u f z. Thus z is an upper hound of X. Assume now that 2/ is any upper bound of X. For
u E x,
each w in W, X, c X. Hence y is an upper bound of X,,, and so V u f u. Since this holds
u E x,
for each v in W, z 5 y. Therefore z = V u. This proves (a).
UEX
Equation (5) follows from (a) by duality.
5.38. Prove that the following identities hold in any Boolean algebra.
(a) x v v u = v (xv4
UEA UEA
(b) x A A u = A @AU)
UEA UEA
(in the sense that, if the left-hand sides exist, so do the right-hand sides, and they
are equal).
Solution :
Observe first that if a set X of elements of a Boolean algebra contains as a member an upper
bound z of X, then z is the lub of X. To prove (a), assume v EA. Then v f V U, and SO
UEA
x v v f xv v u. Thus xv v u is an upper bound of {xv u : uE A}. Assume now that 2/
UEA UEA
is any upper bound of {xv u : uEA}. Then xv u f v for all uE A. We must show that
xv V uf g, which isequivalent to xv V uvy = v. But the latter equation follows by
UEA USA
Problem 5.37(a) and the observation at the beginning of this proof.
Equation (5) follows from (a) by duality.
5.39. If CA is a Boolean subalgebra of %, and Y is a set of elements of CA such that IIL’,” 2/

exists and belongs to CA, show that ,‘$,” y exists and ,yt y = ,u,” y (and similarly,
by duality, for meets).
Solution:
This is an obvious consequence of the fact that the partial order LWQ is the restriction to 04
of the partial order 5% on S. (For,
Xf&W t, xA&W=W, XLCBW ts x/Ysw=w
and x A *w =xAgw.)
5.40. If Y is a set of elements of a field of sets 7 and if y 2, y E F, show that y g, y =

VP y (and, similarly, by duality, for intersections and meets).
UEY
Solution:
Clearly, tlvy y is an upper bound in p of Y. Assume z is an upper bound in y of Y. Then
VGz for all y in Y. Hence ~>~Fvy. Thus U y is the lub in T of Y.
YEY
5.41. Let 7: be a field of subsets of a set W such that, for every w E W, {w} E y. Prove
that joins (meets) coincide with unions (intersections), i.e. if Y is a collection of sets
in 7, then VT y exists if and only if ,vy y E 7 (and therefore by Problem 5.40,
YCY
.y,’ Y = ,yy Y>.
Solution :
In one direction, if
U y E 7, then by Problem 5.40, y yy y is the lub in F of Y. Conversely,
UEY
assume that VT y exists. Then y C VF y for all y in Y. Hence u y c VF u. Let us assume
UEY UEY YEY YEY
that equality does not hold and derive a contradiction. Then there is some u in W such that
u E vy y and u 4 U y. Since {u} belongs to the field T, x = V7: y - {u} also belongs
YEY ( >
to 7: Eld z < vy y. But z is an upper bound of Y, contradicting’tEeYfact that VT y is the
lub of Y. UEY YEY
5.42. Is a complete field of subsets of a set X necessarily the field of all subsets of X?
Solution :
If X contains more than one element, then {e),X} is a complete field of subsets. More gen-
erally, if A is any non-empty subset of X containing at least two elements, then the collection fF
of all subsets Y c X such that Y n A = @ or A C_Y is a complete field of subsets of X not con-
taining any of the non-empty proper subsets of A.
5.43. Prove that any complete field of sets 7 is atomic.
Solution:
Let A be any non-empty set belonging to 7, and let s,, be some element of A. Then the inter-
section H of all sets in 7 which contain x0 is, by the completeness of T, also in T, and it is an atom
included in A. To see that H is an atom, assume W c H and WE 7.
Case 1. s,E W. Then H c W and therefore H = W.
Case 2. x0 B W. Then x,, E H - W E p. Hence H c H - W and therefore W = @.
DUALITY
5.44. (a) If 9 = (B, A, v, ‘, 0, 1) is a Boolean algebra, show that 4Bd = (B, V, A, ‘, 1, 0)
is also a Boolean algebra.
(b) Prove that the function f such that f(x) = x’ is an isomorphism of FE onto CBd.
Solution:
(a) Verification of Axioms (l)-(9) for W is straightforward. Remember that O%d = 19,
1q(d = O‘B* Aq(d = Vs, and vs(d = A%.
(b) f is one-one, since 5’ = 2/’ + x = y. The range of f is B, since x = (z’)‘. Also, f(x A y) =
(Z A 1/)’= 2’ V II’= f(x) V j(y), and f(x’) = 2” = f(x)‘.
INFINITE DISTRIBUTIVITY
5.45. Let A be the set of atoms of a Boolean algebra 3. Prove that T is atomic if and only
if V x=1.
ZEA
Solution:
By Problem 5.13(a), if 9 is atomic, then v x=1. Conversely, assume v x=1.
XEA ZEA
Given any nonzero g in B, we must show that there is an atom b f y. Let us assume not and
derive a contradiction. Then for every atom x, x A y = 0. Hence v (x A y) = 0. But
XEA
V (x A y) = t/ A V x by Theorem 5.35(u). Since V x = 1, we have 0 = V (x AW) = g,
ZEA XEA SEA ZEA
contradicting the fact that y Z 0.
5.46. Prove that a Boolean algebra 3 is isomorphic to a field T(K) of all subsets of a non-
empty set K if and only if T is complete and completely distributive.
Solution:
We already know that T(K) is complete and completely distributive. Conversely, assume B is
complete and completely distributive. Let
w, if 8 is 1
W = B, s = (1, -1) and x,,, =
w’, if 8 is -1
By complete distributivity,
A (wvw’) =
WEB
Hence
Now by Theorem 5.35(u), for any nonzero UE B,
U = UAl = UA v
f E se
Since u f 0, there must be some f E SB such that u A A x,,f(,j Z 0, and therefore

WEB
A XW,f(W)+ 0
WEB
Now observe that if z = A xw,f(wj # 0, then z is an atom. (To see this, assume 0 f w < z.
WEB
We must prove that v = 0. But v < z 5 x,,f(,j. Since x,,f(vj is v or w’ and w < v is impossible,
it follows that x,,~(,,) = 2)‘. Hence v < w’, which implies that w = 0.) Thus for any nonzero
uE B there is an atom z such that z 5 u, i.e. FB is atomic. But we already have proved (cf.
Problem 5.36) that a complete atomic Boolean algebra is isomorphic to some F(K) where K is
non-empty.
5.47. Regular Open Sets (For those readers acquainted with elementary point-set topology).
Let W be a non-empty topological space. For any Y c W, we use the notation Yc for
the closure of Y. Recall that Y is the complement of Y.
Definitions: Ye = F = the complement of the closure of Y. Y is regular if and

only if Y = Yee.
Prove the following assertions.

(1) Y” is open.
(2) XC Y --* Ye c X”. (Hence XC Y -+ Xee c Ye”.)
(3) If Y is open, then Y c Ye,.
(4) If Y is regular, Y is open.
(5) Y is open if and only if Y = 2” for some 2.
(6) If Y is open, then Ye is regular (i.e. if Y is open, Ye = Yeee).
(7) $?Iand W are regular.
(8) If X and Y are open, then (Xn Y)ee = x”“n Yee.
(9) Let B be the set of regular sets of a topological space W. For any sets X and
Y in B, define
XAY = XnY, x v Y = (X u Y)““, X’ = X”
Then % = (B, A, V, ‘, e), ?V) is a complete Boolean algebra (called the regular
open algebra of W).
Solution :
(1) The complement of a closed set is open.
(2) If Xc Y, then XC c YC and therefore F r %.
(3) Since Y C_Yc, Ye = E c Y. Taking closures, we obtain Yet c (P)c = P, since Y is closed.
x
Hence Y = Y c- yet = Yee.
(4) This follows immediately from (1).
(5) If Y = Ze, then Y is open by (1). Conversely, if Y is open, and if we let Z = Y, then 2 is
closed. Hence Ze = 5 = 2 = Y.
(6) Assume Y open. Then by (3), Y c Yee. Hence by (2), Yeee G Ye. On the other hand, since Ye
is open by virtue of (l), it follows by (3) that Ye L Yeee.
(7) @e = @ = @ = 70. Also, qp = CjJ+ = 23 = @ Hence gee = 21/” = @, and CJv””= @e = W.
(8) Assume X and Y open. First, let us prove
X n Yee c (XnYp (4
To see this, observe that X n YC c (Xn Y)c. (For, let x be any point of X n YC and let N be
any open set containing the point x. We must show that N intersects X n Y. But N n X is an
open set containing x, and therefore N n X must intersect Y.) Taking complements, we obtain
(Xn Y)e c Bu Ye. Taking closures, we have (Xn Y)eC c acU Yet = 8U Y~c, and, taking com-
plements again, we obtain the inclusion (a). Now substituting Xee for X in (a), we have
Xeen Yee c (X-n Yp. But exchanging X and Y in (a), we also have (Y nXee) G (Y rlX)ee,
and therefore by (2), (YnXe+e C (Yf7X)eeee. But the last term, by (6), is (Y nX)=?. Hence
Xeen Yee c (Xn Yp. Conversely, since Xn Y L X and XnY c Y, two applications of (2)
yield (Xn Y)ee c Xeen Ye=.
(9) By (‘I), $?lE B and CJvc B. The operation A is closed in B, for, by (8), (XfJY)ee = Xeen Yee =
XnY. The operation v is closed in B, since, by (6),
Similarly, the operation ’ is closed in B, since (X’)ee = Xeee = Xe = X’. Now we must show that
all the axioms for Boolean algebras are satisfied. Axioms (l), (2), (6) and (9) are obvious.
Let us consider Axiom (3):
X A (Yv 2) = Xn (YuZp
= X== n (YuZp
= (Xn(YuZ))ee (by (8))
= ((Xn Y) u (XnZ)p
= (XAY) v (XAZ)
For Axiom (4):
XV (YAZ) = (Xu(YnZ)p = ((XuY)n(XuZ)p
= (XuYp n (XuZp (by (8))
= (Xv Y) A (XVZ)
Axiom (5) is easy: Xv 0 = (XU @)ee= Xee = X. Axiom (8) is also easy: X ~XC. Hence
Xe = XT L 2. Therefore Xn Xe = $3. It remains to prove Axiom (7). First, let us show that
(XUXe)e = 8. Assume, to the contrary, that some point u lies in (XUX+ = (XUX+. Thus
u 4 (xuxy, which implies that there is an open set N containing u and disjoint from
XuX= = XUB. Since NnX=Q, u4Xc, i.e. uE=, contradicting the fact that N is dis-
joint from X u E. Taking closures and complements, we obtain Xv X’ = (XUXe)ee = w = l,,
which is Axiom (7). Thus we have shown that S is a Boolean algebra.
We still have to prove completeness. Note’first that

xFsy f) xAY=x e XnY=X @ XcY
Now let X be any collection of regular sets. Let us show that

\ I
First, for any YE X, n Y L Y and therefore C Yee = Y. Thus

YEX
a lower bound of X. Assume that Z is a regular set which is a lower bound of X. Then Z c Y
for all YE X. Hence Z G y ?x Y, and therefore
z = z== c-
This proves the completeness of ‘8. It may easily be checked that the lub of a collection X
is (y~xY~.)
5.48. Show that a complete Boolean subalgebra % of an algebra of the form T(K) need not
be a complete field of sets (i.e. infinite joins and meets need not coincide with unions
and intersections, respectively).
Solution:
Consider the regular open algebra % of the real line (cf. Problem 5.4’7). It is easy to verify
that every finite open interval is regular. Since every regular set must contain a finite open inter-
val, it follows that the algebra “B is atomless. Hence by Problem 5.43, B cannot be isomorphic to a
complete field of sets.
5.49. Give an example of a complete but not completely distributive Boolean algebra.
Solution:
The regular open algebra of the real line is complete and atomless (cf. Problems 6.47-6.48).
Hence by Problems 5.46 and 5.36, the algebra cannot be completely distributive.
m-COMPLETENESS. a-ALGEBRAS
5.50. Given o-algebras CA and 48. By a a-subalgebra of CA we mean a subalgebra determined
by a subset closed under denumerable joins and meets. By a u-homomorphism of CA
into CBwe mean a homomorphism g of ~4 into LB preserving denumerable joins and
meets (i.e. such that g( A Xi) = A g(Xi); the corresponding equality for joins follows
I
by De Morgan’s Laws). i By a &deal of CA we mean an ideal of & closed under
denumerable joins.
(a) If g is a o-homomorphism of CA into 23, then the range g[cA] is a a-subalgebra of

23, the kernel KB is a u-ideal of CA, and CA/K, is u-isomorphic with g[cA].
(b) If J is a u-ideal of CA, then CA/J is a u-algebra where V (xi + J) = V xi + J

( 1 L ) )y
and CA/J is a o-homomorphic image of CA under the natural mapping.
Solution:
(a) These are just obvious extensions of the results in Problem 5.32.
(a) We must show that fA/J is closed under denumerable unions. To see this; we shall show that
[yxi1 = y [Zi]* Clearly, [xi] 5 [ y zi] and therefore [\, xi]
Assume now that [z] is an upper bound of the [zi]‘s. Note that, in general, [u] 5 [v] if and
is an upper bound.
only if u A 2)’ EJ 0. (For, [U] f [?I] c) [UA W] = [W] c* U A 2, ‘J 0 * (U A V) + 2, =J 0 f)
(UA v) f (1 A v) EJ 0 C, u A (1 f W) sJ 0 f) u A 21’=J 0.) since [Xi] f [Z], Xi A 2’ =J 0. Since 3
is a o-ideal,
mapping 44
V (zi A 2’) “J 0, i.e. 2’ A V 5i =J 0. Hence
1 1
V Xi
[i 1
f [z]. That the natural
= x + J is a a-homomorphism of CA onto CA/J is an easy consequence of the fact
that
c 1
‘y’Xi = y [Xi]*
5.51. For any subset C c T(K), the intersection of all u-subfields of T(K) containing C is
itself a u-subfield containing C.
Solution:
The intersection H clearly is closed under denumerable joins and complements. The u-subfield
H is called the a-subfield generated by C.
5.52. Given a subset C of a a-algebra CA. The intersection D of all a-ideals containing C
is itself a o-ideal containing C (called the u-ideal generated by C). The elements of
D are all those x L y ci for elements ct in C (1 g i < 01).
Solution :
That D is a o-ideal containing C is obvious. Let E be the set of all x f V Ci for some CiE C.
I
First, if ~1 5 V Cij for cij E C, then V xj 6 V cij.
I j i.j Thus E is closed under denumerable joins.
Also, if x E E and y 5 x, then x f V ci for ci E C, and therefore ?/ 5 V Ci, i.e. 2/E E. Thus E
1 t
is a o-ideal containing C. Hence D c E. On the other hand, for any u-ideal J containing C, if
xf V ci for Ci E C, then V ci E J and therefore x E J. Hence E c; D.
f i
5.53. The Loomis Representation Theorem: Any a-ideal CA is a u-homomorphic image of a

u-field of sets, i.e. ~4 is u-isomorphic with the quotient algebra of a &eld of sets by a
u-ideal.
Solution:
Call YE ‘P(A) a selection if and only if, for any a E A, Y contains exactly one of a and a'. Let
S be the set of selections. Define a function 7 from CA into T(S) by setting T(U) equal to the set of
all selections Y such that aE Y. Let 2’be the range of r. Clearly, T is closed under complements:
(r(a)) = ~(a’). Let F be the o-field of subsets of S generated by T. Let N be the subset of F con-
sisting of countable intersections n ~(a~) such that A ai = 0. Let J be the o-ideal generated by
E 1
N. Consider the mapping +(a) = ~(a) + J E F/J. We now show that + is a o-isomorphism of 04
onto F/J.
Let z = V zi in CA. Then, x’A zi = 0. Hence ~(z’)n~(zJ E N. Therefore

z
7(2) n y ‘(Zi) = ~(2’) n U ‘(Zi) = U (T(X))n ‘(ZJ) E J

(i > E
/ I
Also, XA~(ZI) = ZA VZi = ZAZ’ = 0
E 6 )
Hence r(z) n n r(zl) E N and
f
‘(z) n $J T(Zi) ’ = ~(2) n n T(Zi)’ = 4~) n n &) E J
( > t I
Hence T(Z) + IJ r(q) = ‘0 n L/r(zi)> u (42) n (y 44J) E J

z (
It follows that r(z) + J = U r(zJ + J. Therefore
+(z) ’ T(Z) + J = 7 T(z~) + J = $J (‘(Zi) + J)
In addition, q/(d) = T(z’) + J = (T(Z) + J)’ = ($(z))’
Hence + is a o-homomorphism. It is readily seen that the range of $ is F/J. (For, a yd +(4 is a
o-subfield of F containing T and is therefore equal to all of F. Hence $[04] = F/J.) It remains to
show that $ is one-one. To do this, we shall show that the kernel K, is (0). Assume a E K,p So,
&a) = OF/J. Therefore r(a) E J. Note that J consists of all p in F such that p C IJ pi, where
Y~EN. Here vi = n 7(Uij) where A aij = 0. Therefore T(U) C $J fl T(Uij) for sode aij such
j 5 ( j >
that A aij = 0. Hence
5
da) C y T(%,fCi)) (1)
where f is any function such that Ui,fci, is defined for all i. Since we wish to prove that a = 0,
let us assume the contrary, i.e. a # 0. Hence 1 > a’ = a’~ 0 = a’v A alj = ,\ (U’V U,j). There-
fore some a’v Ulj Z 1; say, a’v uifcl, # 1. Then ( 5 > 5
1 > a’ v a,f<i, = a V Ulf(l) v 0 = a’ v aIf v A a2j = A (a’v ulf(l)v a2j)

5 j
Hence 1 > u’v aif v u2fc2) for some j = f(2); etc. We obtain a sequence aifcl), a2f(2), . . . such
that
1 ’ u’ ” alf(l, v a2ft2, v -‘* v ukfck, for each k
Therefore among ulfcl,, u2f(2), . . . neither a nor a complement of any aif occurs. Therefore there
exists a selection Y containing a and all Ul’r(i,. Thus YE T(U), but Y 4 r(oif(i)), contradicting (1).
Remark: This result of Loomis fails to hold for non-denumerable cardinalities [125].
LATTICES
5.54. Which of the partially ordered sets given by the following diagrams are lattices? Among the
lattices, which (i) have a zero element, (ii) have a unit element, (iii) are complemented, (iv) are
modular, (v) are distributive?
(a) eb (b)
1-L
d; ‘*c
t/
b’
1
a’
(4 (4
.
/
/
5.55. Which of the following structures (L, 5) are partially ordered sets, totally ordered sets, lattices,
distributive lattices, lattices with a zero element, lattices with a unit element, complemented lat-
tices? For those which are lattices, describe the operations A and v.
(a) L is the set of all finite subsets of a set A and f is the inclusion relation c_.
(b) Same as (a), except that A itself is also a member of L.
(c) L is the set of complex numbers and a + bi 4 c + di @ a f c.
(d) L is the set of all complex numbers and a + bi 5 c + di e (a < c) v (a = c & b 4 d).
(e) L is the set of all complex numbers and a + bi f c + di @ a 5 c & b f d.
(f) L is the set of all subalgebras of a given Boolean algebra, and f is the inclusion relation C.
(g) L is the set of all sublattices of a given lattice and 5 is the inclusion relation C.
(h) L is the set of all polynomials with real coefficients and f 5 g means that f divides g.
(i) Same as (h), except that the coefficients of the polynomials must be integers.
(j) L is the set of all subsets of a set A, and f is C.
(k) L is the set of positive integers and z 9 y if and only if y is an integral multiple of x (i.e. x
divides y).
(I) Assume (A, 5) is a given partially ordered set. Let C be a fixed set. Let L be the set of all
functions from C into A. For any f and g in L, let f f g if and only if f(s) f g(x) for all
2 in C.
(m) Assume (A, 5) is a given partially ordered set. Let L = A, and x 5 y ff y f x.
(n) L is the set of all infinite subsets of an infinite set A, and 5 is L.
(0) L is the set of all subsets of a set A containing a fixed subset C, i.e. L = {Y : C G Y c A),
and 5 is c_.
(p) L consists of the empty set @ and all points, lines and planes of three-dimensional Euclidean
space, and f is 5.
(q) L is the set of all subgroups of a group G, and f is c_. (This exercise is for those readers
acquainted with elementary group theory.)
(r) L is the set of all convex planar sets and f is C. (By a convex set we mean a set such that,
for any two points in the set, all the points on the line connecting the two given points are
also in the set.)
(s) L is the set of all functions from the unit interval [0, l] of the real line into the set of all
real numbers, and f L g means that f(x) 4 g(x) for all r in [O, 11.
(t) L is the set of all functions from a fixed set A into a lattice (L,, h), and f f g means that
f(x) f g(x) for all z in A.
5.56. In a lattice, prove that u1 v . . . v uk is the lub of {u,, . . .,uk} and u1 A *. . A %k is the glb of
{u,, . . . , d’.
5.57. How many partial orders can be defined on a fixed set of two elements? Of three elements?
(What is the largest number of mutually non-isomorphic partial orders in each case? We say
that a partially ordered structure (A, La) is isomorphic to a partially ordered structure (B, fa) if
and only if there is a one-one function f from A onto B such that x EA y c) f(x) 4s f(y) for all
x and y in A.) Try to extend these results to more than three elements.
5.58. How many (mutually non-isomorphic) lattices are there of two elements? Three elements? Four?
*Five? Six? Draw diagrams of the lattices.
5.59. Given a lattice (L, g). Show by an example that a substructure (L,, s), where L, c L, may be a
lattice, but not a sublattice of (L, 5) (i.e. the operations A~1 and vL1 may not be the restrictions of
the operations A,. and vr,).
5.60. Let L be a lattice with zero 0 and unit 1. An element x in L is said to be complemented if and
only if r has an inverse y (i.e. x A y = 0 and xv y = 1).
(a) If L is distributive, prove that the set of complemented elements is a Boolean algebra (under
the operations A and v of L).
(b) If L is modular (but not distributive), give an example containing six elements to show that
the set of complemented elements need not form a sublattice.
(c) Show by an example that, if L is not distributive, an element can have more than one
complement.
5.61. Show that a lattice (L, g) is complemented if and only if L contains a zero element 0 and there is a
singulary operation x + x’ on L such that:
(i) x A 5’ = 0, (ii) 2” ZY x , (iii) (z V y)’ = x’ A y’
5.62. Finish the proof of Theorem 5.2, i.e. prove that (L6) implies (L5).
5.63. Using Problem 5.4, state and prove a Duality Theorem for lattices.
5.64. Show that the following properties of a distributive lattice

(a) x A x = x
(b) X A (YVZ) = (XA y) V (XA 2)
(C) (YV 2) A X = (y A 5) V (2 A 5)
(d) xv1 = lvz = 1

(e) XA1 = 1AX = X
serve to characterize distributive lattices with a unit element 1 in the sense that if the structure
(A, A,V, 1) satisfies these laws then (A, A, v) is a distributive lattice with unit element 1, and
vice versa [99].
5.65. Prove that the following laws hold in any lattice.

(U) XAy = XVy + X=y
(b) XAyAZ = XVyVZ -+ X=y=z
5.66. Prove that the following inequalities hold in any lattice.

(CL) (XAl/)V(UAW) f (xVU)A(yvw)
(b) (X A y) V (y A 2) V (2 A X) z5 (5 V y) A (y V 2) A (2 V X)
5.67. Prove that each of the following conditions is equivalent to distributivity of a lattice.
(a) (xnyL-2 & x’-yvx) + xfz
(b) (x~z~y~z&xvz~yvz) --f x’y (Hint: Use (a).)
(c) (ZAZ=~AZ & xVZ=~VX) + x=y (Hint: In one direction, use Problem 5.11(c).)
(d) (XV y) A (y V 2) A (XV 2) f (x A y) V (y A 2) V (5 A 2)
5.68. Complete the proof of Problem 5.11(c).
5.69. Give an example of a distributive lattice (L, 5) lacking both zero and unit elements such that f
is not a total order on L.
5.700. If (L, 4) is a lattice, prove that f totally orders L if and only if all subsets of L are sublattices (i.e.
are closed under A and v).
5.71. Prove that any distributive (modular) lattice can be extended to a distributive (modular) lattice
with zero and unit elements simply by adjoining such elements if they are not already present.
5.72. Prove that a lattice is modular if and only if it satisfies the law
(~~~=~Ay&xv,2=yvz&x~y) + x=y
(Hint: In one direction, use Problem 5.10.)
5.73. A lattice (L, 5) is said to be complete if and only if every subset of L has a lub and a glb. Prove
that in order to verify completeness it suffices to show that every subset has a lub or that every
subset has a glb.
5.74. Given lattices (L,, fi) and (L,, fz) and a function f from L1 into L,.
Definitions.
f is an order-homomorphism if and only if x L1 y -+ f(x) L2 f(y).
f is a meet-homomorphism if and only if f(x A~ y) = f(x) off.
f is a join-homomorphism if and only if f(x v1 y) = f(x) v2 f(y).

f is a lattice-homomorphism if and only if f is both a meet-homomorphism
and a join-homomorphism.
Prove:
(a) Every meet-homomorphism is an order-homomorphism.
(b) Every join-homomorphism is an order-homomorphism.
(c) Every lattice homomorphism is a meet-homomorphism.
(d) Every lattice homomorphism is a join-homomorphism.
(e) The converses of (a)-(d) do not hold. (Counterexamples may be found using lattices of at
most four elements.)
(f) For one-one functions f from L, onto L,, the notions of order-, meet-, join-, and lattice-
homomorphism are equivalent.
(g) Any order-isomorphism from a Boolean algebra CA onto a Boolean algebra ‘5 is a Boolean
isomorphism, i.e. not only is it a lattice-homomorphism, but it also preserves complements:
f(x’) = (f(x))‘.
5.15. A lattice (L, L--‘)is said to be relatively pseudo-complemented if and only if, for any x, y in .L, the
set {,z : !I 4 z 5 x} has a lub. (Such a lub is denoted y 3 x.) By a pseudo-Boolean algebra, we
mean a relatively pseudo-complemented lattice possessing a zero element 0. Prove ([142]):
(4 In a relatively pseudo-complemented lattice:
(ii z 5 y + x if and only if y A x 5 x.
(ii) The distributive laws hold.
[iii) For any x, x 3 x is a unit element 1.
(ivj y 3 x = 1 if and only if y 5 x.
(VI x = !/ if and only if x 3 y = y 3 x = 1.
(vi) z,+1=1
(vii) I 2 x = x
(viii) YA(Y3Xx)“X
(ix) If x 5 y, then y * z f x 3 z and z I$ x 5 z 3 y.
ix) x’y+x
(xij yA(y*x) = y/\x
(xii) (y +’ X) A X = X
(xiii) (x + y) A (x 3x) = x j (y Ax)

(Xiv) (x + 2) A (Y %’Z) = (y V X) 3 z
(xv) X +’ cl/ +’ X) = (X A Y) +’ Z = Y 3 (X +’ Z)
(xvi) (x 3 Y) A (Y rs x) 4 x + x
(xvii) (x 3 y) G (y I$ 2) 3 (x 3 2)
(xviii) x s y j (x A y).
(b) In a pseudo-Boolean algebra, we define: -x = x 3 0. Then:
(i) -0 = 1 and -1 = 0
(ii) x A (-x) = 0
(iii) xey + -y”-x
(iv) x&--x
---x=-x
(VI
(vi) -(xvy) = -x/Y-y
(vii) -(xPty) 2 -xv-y
(viii) (-2) v y f x 3 y
(ix) x 3 Y f C-Y) 3 (-4
c-4 X +'(-Y) = -(XAY) = Y+'(-X)
(4 0+x=1
(xii) A subset F is a filter if and only if 1 E F and
(xEF&z+yEF) --) yEF
(c) In a Boolean algebra, show that y j x = y’ v x.

((0 (For those readers acquainted with elementary point-set topology.) Show that the lattice of
all open sets of a topological space is a pseudo-Boolean algebra, where A j B is the,.interior
of AuB. By taking the special case of the real line, show that the assertions x v (-5) = 1
and - -x = x do not hold for all pseudo-Boolean algebras.
(e) By a Brouwerian lattice we mean a lattice with a unit element such that, for any X,Y in the
lattice, the glb of the set {z : y 5 xv z} exists (and is denoted y I x). Show that the notion
of Brouwerian lattice is dual to the notion of pseudo-Boolean algebra in the sense that a lattice
(B, 5) is a pseudo-Boolean algebra if and only if the lattice (L, ‘) is a Brouwerian lattice.
(For a study of Brouwerian lattices, cf. [133].)
(f) In the Boolean algebra of statement bundles (cf. Example 3.5), for any statement forms A and
B, what is the interpretation of [A} 3 [B]?
ATOMS
5.76. Prove that two finite Boolean algebras are isomorphic if and only if they have the same number
of atoms.
5.77. Show that there is no Boolean algebra containing 28 elements.
5.78. In the Boolean algebra of all divisors of n, where n is a square-free integer > 1 (cf. Problem 3.3),
what are the atoms? Note that x 5 y t) x divides y.
5.79. (a) How many subalgebras are there of the Boolean algebra of all subsets of a four-element set?
(5) Given a Boolean algebra 9 with 2k elements, show that the number of subalgebras of 4B is
equal to the number of partitions of a set with k elements (where a partition is a division of
the set into one or more disjoint non-empty sets).
5.80. If CA and % are Boolean algebras with the same finite number 2k of elements, how many isomor-
phisms are there from 04 onto %?
5.81. Consider the Boolean algebra given by the field of sets consisting of all finite unions of left-open
intervals of real numbers (cf. Problem 2.68). What are the atoms of this algebra?
5.82n. Does the set of atoms of a Boolean algebra always have a supremum?
5.83, Show that every atomic, uniquely complemented lattice with zero and unit elements is isomorphic
to a field of sets and is therefore a Boolean algebra. (Hint: Use the proof of Theorem 5.7.)
SYMMETRIC DIFFERENCE. BOOLEAN RINGS

5.84. In an arbitrary Boolean algebra:
(a) Does the distributive relation x + (y A z) = (5 + y) A (x + z) hold?
(a) Is (5 f y & u f V) + z + u f y + w valid?
5.85. In the Boolean algebra of all divisors of n, where n is a square-free integer > 1 (cf. Problem 3.3),
find an arithmetic formula for the symmetric difference z + y.
5.86. In any Boolean algebra, prove:

(a) zv (z-i-y) = zvy, (a) the “dual” of z+ y is (x + y)‘.
5.87. In a.ring, z-y is defined to be 5 + (-y). In a Boolean ring, what is (-y)? Is there any difference
between x - y in the ring-theoretic sense and x - y as defined in Problem 3.1?
5.88. Prove that the uniqueness of (-5) in Axiom (4) for rings need not be assumed (i.e. it can be proved
from the other axioms).
5.89. (a) Give an example of a Boolean ring without a unit element. (b) Show that every Boolean ring
without a unit element can be extended (by addition of new elements and extension of the ring
operations to the enlarged set) to a Boolean ring with unit element. Prove that the original ring
is a maximal ideal of the extension.
5.90. In the axioms for Boolean rings, show that 5+ y = y + z is not independent.
5.91. Let q = (R, f, X, 0) be a commutative ring with unit element 1. We say that an element x in R
is idempotent if and only if xs = x. Let R* be the set of idempotent elements of R. For any x
and 2/ in R*, define x@y=s+y-22s~. Prove that (R*, @, X, 0) is a Boolean ring with unit
element 1. Express the Boolean operations A,V, ’ in terms of the original ring operations +, X.
5.92. For any Boolean expression r(u), prove that

7(u) = b, + (b, AU)
where b, and b, are fixed elements of the Boolean algebra.
5.93. Solve the following equations.

(a) u A w = 0
(b) u A z = w
(c) u + w = 7 (for u and w in terms of T)
(d) (p A U) v (o A w) = 7 (for u and w in terms of p, 0, T)
5.94. Solve the simultaneous equations

xvb = c
x/\b = 0
for 2 in terms of b and c. What further conclusion follows if b f c?
5.95. Solve the following system of equations.

u f wvw
2) = ZAW’
u’ A z f w’
5.96. If T(U) is a Boolean expression and b is an element of a Boolean algebra 9, and if T(O)A ~(1) f
b 6 ~(0) v r(l), prove:
(a) T(U) = b has a solution. Find all solutions.
(b) If T(U) = b has a unique solution, then, for any c, r(u) = c has a unique solution (namely,
44).
(c) If FBis finite and there are k atoms which are 5 ~(0)’+ 7(l), then r(u) = b has 2k solutions.
AXIOMATIZATIONS
5.97D. In our axiom system for Boolean algebras, determine whether Axiom (6) can be proved from
Axioms (l)-(4), (7)-(g). (See Problem 5.22.)
5.98. Determine whether or not each of the axioms (Bl)-(B5) for Byrne algebras (cf. Section 5.4) is
independent.
5.99. Show that the following variation of the axioms for Byrne algebras (cf. Section 5.4) also may serve
as an axiom system for Boolean algebras. Consider structures (B, A, ‘) satisfying (Bl), (B2), (B5), and
(Cl xhy’ = ZAZ’ - XAy=X
(Hint: Prove that z A z’ = w A w’ for all z and w, and introduce 0 by definition as being equal
to this common value of all z A z’.)
5.100. (a) Prove that the following is a system of axioms for Boolean algebras.
WI XAy = yAX
03% 2 A (y”Z) = (X Ay) A 2
(D3) (2’ Ay’)’ A (2’ Ay)’ = 5
(b) Investigate the independence of Axioms (Dl)-(D3).
5.101. Prove the independence of Axioms (a)-(f) for lattices in Problem 5.4.
5.102. [121]. Let L be a complemented lattice. Show that L is a Boolean algebra if and only if, for any
x and y in L and for any complement z of y, x A y = 0 ++ x f z.
5.103. [loll. Given a structure % = (B, A, 9. Prove that ‘5 determines a Boolean algebra if and only
if the following two laws are satisfied.
(a) x=x/Ty ++ XAy’=zAz’
(b) (X A y) A z = (y A z) A x
5.104. [122]. Prove that a structure ‘B = (B, v, ‘) determines a Boolean algebra if and only if the
following three laws are satisfied.
(a) xvy = yvx
(b) (xvy)vx = xv(yvx)
(c) (x’v y’)’ v (x’v y)’ = x
IDEALS
5.105. If A is an infinite set, prove that the ideal of all finite subsets of A is not a principal ideal in the
field of sets T(A).
5.106. Prove that a non-empty subset J of a Boolean algebra is an ideal if and only if the condition
xvyEJ t, (xEJ&yEJ) is satisfied.
5.107. What is the ideal generated by the empty subset P, of a Boolean algebra?
5.108. Given a Boolean algebra 9. For any ideals J and Z of 9, let

JVZ = {xvy: xEJ&yEZ}
(a) Prove that J v Z is an ideal.
(b) Show that the set of ideals of % forms a distributive lattice under the operations of n and v.
Are there zero and unit elements? Is the lattice complemented?
5.109. A non-trivial finitely-additive measure on a Boolean algebra % is a function /I from B into the set
of non-negative real numbers such that
(1) ,U(xv y) = p(x) + p(y) if x A y = 0.
(2) p is not a constant function.
(a) If p is a non-trivial finitely-additive measure on a Boolean algebra 3, prove:

6) ~(0) = 0
(ii) &I v .** v x,) = p(x1) + .*. + p(xk) if Xi A Xj = 0 for i P j.
(iii) x f y + p(x) f p(y)
(iv) p(x, v . . f v xk) s i&l) + ’*. + dx,)
(v) J, = {x : p(x) = 0) is a proper ideal of ‘5.
(vi) If p is 2-valued, i.e. if the range of p consists of two numbers (one of which, by (i), must
be 0), then J, is a maximal ideal.
(vii) If p is bounded, i.e. the range of p is bounded above, and if we define Y(Z) = a(x)la(l),
then Y is a non-trivial finitely-additive measure such that 0 f Y(X) 5 1 and r(1) = 1.
(b) If M is a maximal ideal of ‘5, and if we define

TO if xEM
P(X) = 1 if x4M
1
for any x in B, show that p is a non-trivial 2-valued finitely-additive measure on 9.
(c) If % is the Boolean algebra T(K), where K is a finite set, and if we define h(A) = the number
of elements in A, prove that p is a non-trivial finitely-additive measure on ‘9.
(d) Prove that every Boolean algebra admits a non-trivial e-valued finitely-additive measure.
5.110. Given a subset D of a Boolean algebra !B, recall (cf. Problem 3.5) that the intersection of all sub-
algebras containing D is a subalgebra G,, called the subalgebra generated by D.
(a) Prove that the elements of Gn are all elements of the form c1 v -0. v c,, where each
ci = dj,” --. Ad., and either dj,, E D or dj’, E D, i.e. the elements of GD are finite joins of
T
finite meets of elements of D and complements of elements of D.
(b) Show that the subalgebra Gn of T(K) generated by the set D of all singletons consists of all
finite and cofinite sets. Prove that Go is complete if and only if K is finite.
(c) We say that a set D is a set of generators of the Boolean algebra ‘B if and only if the sub-
algebra GD generated by D is the whole set B. We say that 73 is finitely generated if and only
if there is a finite set of generators of ‘3. Prove that every finitely generated Boolean algebra
is finite.
(d) We say that a set D of generators of a Boolean algebra % is a free set of generators of “B if
and only if, for every function h from D into a Boolean algebra C, there is an extension g
of h which is a Boolean homomorphism of 93 into C. The Boolean algebra ‘9 is said to be free
if and only if there is a free set of generators of %.
U) For any non-negative integer k, if FBis a Boolean algebra having a free set of k gen-
erators, prove that % has 2(2”) elements.
(ii) Is every subalgebra of a free Boolean algebra also free?
(iii) Show that the cardinal number of any infinite free Boolean algebra ‘5 is equal to the
cardinal number of any free set of generators of ‘5.
(iv) Show that if D, and D, are free sets of generators of the same Boolean algebra 9, then
D, and D, have the same cardinal number.
(v) If h is a function from a free set D of generators of a Boolean algebra CBinto a Boolean
algebra C, show that there is a unique homomorphism g from FBinto C such that g is an
extension of h.
(vi) If D, is a free set of generators of %i and D, is a free set of generators of ‘R2 and D,
and D, have the same cardinal number, then ‘BB,and 48, are isomorphic.
(vii) Let D be a set of generators of a Boolean algebra ‘3. Show that D is a free set of
generators of % if and only if, for any ui, . . ., u, in B, if uiE D or u;E D for each I*~,
then zii A . * * A u, f 0.
(viii) For any cardinal number m, prove that there is a Boolean algebra having a free set of
generators of cardinality m. (Hint: Generalize the Boolean algebra of statement bundles
(Example 3.5) by using a set of statement letters of cardinality m instead of a denumer-
able set of statement letters.)
(ix)n When is T(K) a free Boolean algebra?
QUOTIENT ALGEBRAS
5.111. Let J be a proper ideal of a Boolean algebra ‘% and let K be a proper ideal of the quotient algebra
‘Bs=TVJ. Let JO = {x: xEB & x+JJK}. Prove that Jo is a proper ideal in ‘B and that
the function + from WJO onto %#lK defined by
+(x + Jo) = (x + J) + K
is an isomorphism.
5.112. In a Boolean algebra ‘3, B is an ideal. What is ‘B/B? Why isn’t it a Boolean algebra?
5.113. (For those readers acquainted with elementary point-set topology.) Let X be a topological space.
(a) Prove that the set F of subsets of 2 having nowhere dense boundary is a field of sets.
(b) Prove that the set N of nowhere dense sets of X is an ideal of F.
(c) Show that the quotient algebra F/N is isomorphic to the algebra of regular open sets of X
(cf. Problem 5.47). (Hint: If A E F, show that there is a unique regular set A, such that
A + A, is nowhere dense.)
BOOLEAN REPRESENTATION THEOREM

5.114. Prove that every ideal of a Boolean algebra % is principal if and only if LB is finite.
5.115. For each s in a set S assume that there is an associated Boolean algebra ‘Bs. By the Cartesian
product n 48, we mean the set of all functions f defined on S such that, for each s E S, f(s) E B,.
SE.9
We define Boolean operations on the Cartesian product in componentwise fashion, e.g. if f and g
are in the Cartesian product, let f A g be the function defined on S such that (f A g)(s) = f(s) +8, g(s)
for each s ES.
(a) Prove that the Cartesian product of Boolean algebras is a Boolean algebra.
(b) Prove that a finite Boolean algebra of cardinality 2n is isomorphic to a Cartesian product of
n copies of the Boolean algebra (0, l}.
(c) If the cardinal number of a set A is m, prove that the Boolean algebra T(A) is isomorphic to
a Cartesian product of m copies of {O,l}.
(d) Show that every Boolean algebra is isomorphic to a subalgebra of a Cartesian product of
copies of (0, l}.
5.116. (a) Prove that if x and y are distinct elements of a distributive lattice, then there is a prime ideal
containing one of x and y but not the other. (The notion of prime ideal, although
originally defined for Boolean algebras, also makes sense for lattices. Hint for the proof:
Since z f y, we may assume y $ 2. Let 2 be the set of all ideals containing x but not y,
and apply Zorn’s Lemma.)
(b) Prove that any distributive lattice is lattice-isomorphic to a lattice of sets. (Hint: To each
element z of the lattice associate the set of proper prime ideals not containing x.)
(c) Prove the converse of (a), i.e. a lattice is distributive if, for any two distinct elements of the
lattice, there is a prime ideal containing one of the elements but not the other.
5.117. Although every Boolean algebra is, by Theorem 5.30, isomorphic to a field of sets, show that there
are Boolean algebras % for which there is no isomorphism to a field of sets preserving infinite
joins and meets. (Hint: Consider the regular open algebra of the real line (Problem 5.47).)
5.118D. [137]. Prove that a distributive lattice is a Boolean algebra if and only if every proper prime
ideal is maximal.
INFINITE MEETS AND JOINS

5.119. Give an example of a Boolean subalgebra C of a Boolean algebra ‘8 such that some subset E of C
has a lub in C but not in ‘B.
5.120. In any lattice, prove (assuming that all the indicated lub’s and glb’s exist):
(4 If 2, f yw for all w E W, then A x, f A y, and V X, L_ V &,.
WEW WEW WEW WUEW
W V A sw f A V %t.
SGSWGW WEWSES
(4 A xl0 v A Y, 6 A hwv l/w).
WEW WEW IDEW
(4 V (x,~vw) f V 2, A V ?dw.
WEW UIEW WEW
(e) None of the inequalities in (a)-(d) can be changed into equalities valid for all lattices.
5.121. An ideal J of a Boolean algebra is said to be complete if and only if J is closed under arbitrary
joins of its elements.
(a) Prove that every complete ideal is a principal ideal.
(b) If .I is a complete ideal of a complete Boolean algebra “8, prove that the quotient algebra
S/J is complete.
5.122. (a) Prove that the set of sublattices of a lattice is a complete lattice with respect to the inclusion
relation C. What are the operations of join and meet?
(b) Prove that the set of subalgebras of a Boolean algebra is a complete lattice with respect to
the inclusion relation C. Describe the join and meet operations.
5.123. (a) Assume that g is a closure operation on a set L partially ordered by f, i.e. g is a function
from L into L such that:
(1) x5 Y + g(s) 5 g’(Y)
(2) x 5 d4
(3) gkm) = g(x)
An element x in L is said to be g-closed if and only if g(x) = x. Prove:
(i) z is g-closed if and only if x = g(y) for some y.
(ii) If 1 is a maximum element of L, then 1 is g-closed.
(iii) A glb of a set of g-closed elements is also g-closed. In particular, if x and y are g-closed,
so is x A y (if it exists).
(iv) If (L, G) is a complete lattice, then the set C of g-closed elements is a complete lattice with
respect to the original ordering 5 on L, and, for any subset Y of L,
A,“” = ALY and vc Y = g vL Y

ICY llEY IIEY
( >
(b) Let f be a partial order on L. For any Y C_L, let Yb = the set of upper bounds of Y and
Ys = the set of lower bounds of Y. We say that Y is a cut if and only if Y = Ybs. Prove:
(9 YcYbs
(ii) Y c Ysb
(iii) XC Y -+ (YbcXb & Ys~XS) + (XbScYbs & XSbcYSb)
(iv) Xb = Xbsb & XS = Xsbs
(v) Xbs = Xbsbs & Xsb = Xsbsb
(vi) Every set X~S is a cut.

(vii) The function g(X) = Xbs is a closure operation on (T(L), z;). The g-closed elements are
the cuts.
(viii) The set C of all cuts is a complete lattice with respect to G. Meets are intersections and
v Y= yixY bs. The function f, such that f(x) = (x}bS for any x in L, is an
YEX
( >
order-isomorphism of (L, 4) into the complete lattice (C, c); f preserves all meets and
joins already existing in (L, c), i.e. if z = V 2, in L, then f(z) = V f(x,) in C,
and similarly for meets. CYEA CCEA
(ix) Let c = (L, 5) determine a Boolean algebra, i.e. it is a distributive, complemented lat-
tice. Define, for any XC L, X* = {y : yr\ x = O}. Then
(1) XnX* = (0) = oc
(2) (XuX*)b = (1)
(3) (XuX*)bs = L = 1,
(4) X** = XbS
(5) {x’}bs = {x}bs*
(6) X** is an ideal of L.
(7) The function F such that F(J) = J ** for any ideal J of < is a lattice-homomorphism
from the distributive lattice of all ideals of .4Jonto the lattice of cuts.
(8) Hence C forms a complete Boolean algebra, and the lattice-isomorphism f of (viii) is
a Boolean isomorphism. Thus every Boolean algebra is embeddable in a complete
Boolean algebra in such a way that unions and meets are preserved [131].
5.124. In Example 5.19, prove that the collection of all singletons {x}, where XE K, has no lub in 7 (in
addition to not having its union in 7).
m-COMPLETENESS. o-ALGEBRAS
5.125. Let p be the collection of all subsets A of a given set K such that the cardinality of A or the
cardinality of A is 5 a given infinite cardinal number m. Prove that 7 is an m-complete field of
sets. What happens if we change 5 to < ? If K has cardinal number n > m and m < p f n,
is 7 a p-complete field of sets?
5.126. If T is an m-complete field of subsets of a set K and A E 7, prove that 7 [ A = {Y : YE p & Y c A

is also an m-complete field of sets.
5.127. Prove that an infinite u-algebra must have at least 2% elements. (Hint: Problem 5.14.)
5.128. By a free a-algebra with m generators we mean a a-algebra ‘B having a subset D of cardinality
m such that any function from D into a a-algebra C can be extended to a o-homomorphism h from
CBinto C.
(a)n For every cardinal number m, show that there is a free o-algebra with m generators.
(b) Prove the analogues of Problem 5.llO(d)(iv)-(vi) for free o-algebras.
(c) Prove that any free o-algebra with m generators is isomorphic to a u-field of sets. (Hint:
Use Problem 5.53.)
5.129. We say that a Boolean algebra 3 satisfies the countable chain condition (CCC) if and only if every
pairwise-disjoint set of nonzero elements of B is countable. (A set Y is said to be pairwise-dis-
joint if and only if, for any distinct elements q and z in Y, y A x = 0.)
(a) Prove that a Boolean algebra % satisfies (CCC) if and only if every subset 2 c B has a count-
able subset Y such that Y and 2 have the same set of upper bounds.
(b) Prove that any u-algebra satisfying (CCC) is complete.
(c) Show that the regular open algebra of a topological space with a countable base satisfies (CCC).
(Cf. Problem 5.47.)
AppendixA
Elimination of Parentheses
More extensive conventions for eliminating parentheses than those given in Section
1.4, page 5, will be presented here.
(I) We assign a rank to the connectives as follows:
t) 5
+ 4
3
i 2
1 1
The rank of a statement form A will be

(a) 0, if A is a statement letter;
(b) the rank of the principal connective of A, otherwise.
We shall describe our procedure for eliminating parentheses by induction on the number
of occurrences of connectives in the statement form. (The description will appear com-
plicated, but the simplicity of the procedure will become apparent after a few examples.)
Clearly, if A has no connectives, it is a statement letter and has no parentheses. Assume
that we have described the procedure for all statement forms having fewer than k
occurrences of connectives, and assume that A has k occurrences of connectives.
Case (i) : (1 B). If B itself is of the form (1 C), then we apply our
A is a denial
procedure to (1 C) and omit the outer parentheses (if any) of the resulting expression,
obtaining some expression D. The final result is taken to be (1 D). If B is not of the form
(1 C), and the application of our procedure to B yields E, then the final result is (1 E).
Case (ii): A is (Bo~C), where (Yis c), +, v or &. We apply the procedure for eliminating
parentheses to B and C, obtaining B* and C*. At this stage we have (B*aC*). We drop
the outermost pair of parentheses (if any) from B* if the rank of (Yis greater than or equal
to the rank of B. We drop the outermost pair of parentheses (if any) from C* if the rank
of a: is greater than the rank of C.
(II) After completion of (I), we omit the outermost pair of parentheses (if any).
Examples.
A.l. (l(-iA)).
Applying (I), Case (i), twice, we obtain ( 1lA). Then by (II) we have 1lA. In general, no
parentheses are needed to separate successive negations.
A.2. ((A v B) + C).

The principal connective is +, of rank 4. Since (A v B) has rank 3, we obtain, by (I), Case (ii),
(A v B + C), and finally by (II), A v B + C.
190
APPENDIX A] ELIMINATION OF PARENTHESES 191
A.3. (A v (B + C)).
The principal connective is v, of rank 3. Since (B+ C) has rank 4, we do not drop the parentheses
from (B + C). Thus in this example (I) allows no elimination of parentheses, and by (II) we obtain
A v (B-tC).
A-4. (((B v A) ++ B) --f ((-I B) & C)).
+ is the principal connective. Application of (I) to ((B v A) e B) yields (B v A c) B), and application
of (I) to (( 1 B) & C) yields (1 B & C). Since the rank of * is greater than that of +, we leave the outermost
pair of parentheses of (B v A H B). However, since the rank of & is less than that of +, we omit the
outermost pair of parentheses from ( 1 B & C). The final result is (B v A @ B) + 1B & C.
A.5. ((A v B) v C).

The right-most v is the principal connective. Since (A v B) has rank equal to that of v, we may drop
the parentheses, obtaining (A v I? v C), and finally by (II), A v B v C.
A.6. (A v (B v C)).
The left-most v is the principal connective. Since (B v C) has rank equal to that of v, we cannot drop
the parentheses. Thus (I) yields no elimination of parentheses, and by (II) we obtain A v (B v C).
The results given in Examples A.5 and A.6 illustrate the principle of association to the
left. Thus A v B v C stands for ((A v B) v C). Likewise A + B + C stands for ((A + B) + C),
and the same holds for the other binary connectives. Association to the left is due to our
agreemen that in (B CY
C), we omit outer parentheses from B if rank (B) 4 rank (a), but from
C if rank(C) < rank (a).
A.7. ((A v (B v C)) v (B & (-I (-I C)))).
Application of (I) to (A v (23v C)) yields no elimination of parentheses, while (B & ( l(1 C))) becomes
(B & 11 C). Then by (I) we obtain (A v (B v C) vB& llC), and finally Av(BvC)v B&z llc.
The rough idea of convention (I) is that connectives of higher rank are to have greater
scope than those of lower rank. Thus if elimination of parentheses yields A v B + C, this
stands for ((A v B) + C). The connective +, being of higher rank than v, must “connect”
the longest possible statement forms to the left and right. Thus + has (A v B) as its ante-
cedent rather than just B. Similarly, in A + B&B H D v B, c) is the connective of highest
rank. Hence the left side of ti should be (A -+ B&B) and the right side should be D v B.
Thus we have (A + B&B) t) (D v B). Within (A + B&B), + is stronger, and we obtain
((A + (B&B)) t) (D v B)).
In ordinary arithmetic, without realizing it we already have been taught an analogous

ranking of arithmetic operations. Addition is strongest, then comes multiplication, and
finally exponentiation. For example, 4 + 2 *5 stands for 4 + (2 *5), and not for (4 + 2) 5, ??
while 5 * 23 stands for 5 * (23), not for (5 *2)3.

Sometimes, especially in long statement forms, for the sake of clarity we can keep
some parentheses which could be omitted according to our conventions. For example, in
A.7 above we might write A v (B v C) v (B & 11 C) instead of A v (B v C) v B & 11 C.
192 ELIMINATION OF PARENTHESES [APPENDIX A
Solved Problems
A.l. Describe an algorithm (i.e. effective procedure) for determining whether a given
expression is a statement form, and for determining the principal connective when
the expression is a statement form.
Solution:
The description is given by induction on the number of occurrences of connectives. If there are
no connectives, then the expression is a statement form if and only if it is a statement letter.
Assume now that an expression A has k connectives, where k > 0, and that our algorithm already
has been defined for expressions with fewer than k occurrences of connectives. If A does not
begin with a left parenthesis and end with a right parenthesis, then A is not a statement form.
If A does have the appropriate initial left and terminal right parentheses, omit them, obtaining an
expression 8.
Case 1. B has the form 1C. If C is a statement form, then A is a statement form and its
principal connective is 1. If C is not a statement form, then neither is A.
Case 2. B is not of the form 1 C. For each of the binary connectives 0 in B, if B is C 0 D

and if C and D are statement forms, then A is also a statement form with principal connective [7.
On the other hand, if the indicated condition does not hold for any of the binary connectives 0 in
B, then A is not a statement form.
A.2. Eliminate as many parentheses as possible from:

(a) (((AvB)~(lC))v((lB)&C)
(b) ((A & (1 (1 B))) * (B - CCv B)))
(4 (P - cc v B)) - (A & (l(l B))))
Solution:
(a) The second v is the principal connective. Since v has higher rank than &, we can omit the
outer parentheses from (( 1 B) & C). Since + has higher rank than v, we cannot drop the outer
parentheses from ((A v B) + (1 C)). But within ((A v B) + (1 C)) we can drop the outer paren-
theses from (A v B), since + has higher rank than V:
(AvB+(lC)) v (lB)&C
Finally, we can drop the parentheses around the denials:
(AvB+ 1C) v -IB&C
(b) @ is the principal connective. We can omit the outer parentheses of (A & (l(1 B))), since e
has higher rank than &:
A&(l(lB)) - (B-(CvB))
However, we cannot omit the outer parentheses of (B @ (Cv B)), since the latter has the same
rank as t, and appears on the right hand side of the biconditional. Within (B W (Cv B)) we
can drop the parentheses of (Cv B), and, on the other side, we can drop the parentheses around
the denials:
A& l-iB - (BoCvB)
(c) This is the same as (b) except that the two sides of the biconditional have been reversed. Since
(B @ (Cv B)) now appears on the left hand side of the biconditional, we can drop the outer
parentheses:
B-(CvB) * A&(l(lB))
As before, we then obtain

B-CvB - A& -~-IB
In practice, we would never eliminate all the parentheses in part (c), since their complete
elimination will not facilitate the interpretation of the original statement form.
APPENDIX A] ELIMINATION OF PARENTHESES 193
A.3. Describe an algorithm for determining whether a given expression A has been
obtained from a statement form as a result of applying our conventions for elimi-
nating parentheses (and, if it has, find the statement form).
Solution:
We shall describe, by induction on the number of symbols of A, a procedure which either will
find the statement form abbreviated by A or will eventually tell us that there is no such statement
form. Clearly, if A has one symbol, then A abbreviates a statement form (A itself) if and only if
A is a statement letter. Now assume that A has k symbols (where k > 1) and that our algorithm
has been defined for all expressions with fewer than k symbols.
Case 1. A either does not begin with a left parenthesis or does not end with a right paren-
thesis. (Hence if A does abbreviate a statement form F, then the outer parentheses of F were
omitted.)
Case la. Aisoftheform ll... l(B). If B abbreviates a statement form G (and hence B does
not have the outer parentheses of G), then A abbreviates (1 ( l(. . .( 1 G) . . .))). Otherwise, A is not
an abbreviation of a statement form.
Case lb. Aisoftheform ll... 1 B, where B is a statement letter. Then A abbreviates

(l(l(...(lB)...))).
Case le. A is not of the form 11 . . . l(B), and not of the form 11 . . . 1B (where B is a
statement letter). For each occurrence of a binary connective # in A, represent A as C # D. If
(i) C abbreviates a statement form H,
(ii) D abbreviates a statement form J,
(iii) C contains the outer parentheses of H (if any) if the rank of H is greater than or equal to
that of #,
(iv) D contains the outer parentheses of J (if any) if the rank of J is greater than the rank of
#, then A abbreviates (H # 1).
If no occurrence of a binary connective in A satisfies (i)-(iv), then A does not abbreviate
a statement form.
Case 2. A is of the form (B).
Case 2a. Omit the initial left and terminal right parentheses, and then apply Case 1 to B.
If B abbreviates a statement form C, then A abbreviates C also.
Case 2b. If Case 2a does not show A to be an abbreviation of a statement form, apply the
procedure of Case lc. If we obtain a statement form D, then A abbreviates D.
Examples.
(a) B * C v B. Case lc applies. First, we try H as principal connective. The left side is B,
and the right side C v B, which abbreviates (C v B). Since (C v B) has rank less than that of
@, the outer parentheses around Cv B have been legitimately omitted. Thus we obtain
(B - (Cv B)).
(b) A & 1 B & A. Case lc applies. First, we consider the left-most &. The left side is A and
the right side is 1B &A. Hence we must consider 1 B &A. Again, Case lc applies and we
consider &. The left side is 1B (which is an abbreviation of (1B)) and the right side is A.
Thus 1 B & A abbreviates (( 1 B) &A), but, since (( 1 B) & A) has rank equal to that of &, clause
(iv) has been violated. Next, we try the second &. The left side is A & 1 B, which is easily
seen to abbreviate (A & (1 B)). Hence the original statement form is ((A & ( 1B)) &A).
(c) 1lAvB. Case lc applies. The left side of v is 1 IA, which by Case lb abbreviates
(1 ( 1A)). Hence we obtain (( 1 (1A))v B).
(d) A v 1 (A v C). Case lc applies and we look at the first v. The right side is 1 (A v C). To
the latter, Case lb applies and we see immediately that A v C is a statement form. Hence the
original statement form is (A v ( 1 (A v C))).
194 ELIMINATION OF PARENTHESES [APPENDIX A
A.4 Find the ranks of the following statement forms.
(a) A; (a) (W; (4 (1 WV 0); (4 ((A+ (19)&A); (e) (A + ((lB)&A)).
A.5. Eliminate as many parentheses as possible from the following.
(a) (((lA)“(R&C))+ (A-(-W))
(b) ((A+(l(lB)))v (164 kc)))
(4 ((t-4 -, ( 1 A)) + f9 + (-4 + B))
(4 ((lA)+@+B))
A.& Determine whether each of the following expressions is an abbreviation of a statement form, and,
if so, construct the statement form.
(a) Av -IB+(BwC)&A
(b) A-B+ 1lAvB
(c) l(AvB)vA&B
(d) AvBv (C+D)
A.7. Show that if A is a statement form, then there is at most one connective 0 such that A is of the
form (B 0 C), where B and C are statement forms.
A.3 Show that the algorithm of Problem A.3 is correct, i.e. when B is an abbreviation of a statement
form A, then the algorithm applied to B yields A as its only answer, and when B is not an abbrevia-
tion of a statement form, then the algorithm says so.
Parenthesis-free Notation
We may avoid the use of parentheses if we redefine the notion of statement form as
follows: (i) every statement letter is a statement form; (ii) if A and B are statement forms,
so are 1 A, & AB, v AB, + AB, c) AB.
Examples.
The statement form ((1A) & (B v A)) would be rewritten as & 1A v BA. The statement form
(A + (( 1B) e (A v C))) would be rewritten as -t A e 1B v AC.
This way of writing statement forms is sometimes called Polish notation (in honor of its
inventor J. Lukasiewicz).
Examples.
+v AB v 1 C & 1 BC is Polish notation for the statement form ((A v B) + (( 1 C) v (( 1B) 6%C))). Sim-
ilarly, e KzAl 1B e B v CB is Polish notation for ((A & (1 (1B))) * (B e (C v B))).
Solved Problems
B.l. Write the following statement forms in Polish notation.
(4 ((((1 A) v (B & C)) + (A * (-’ B)))
(b) ((A + (‘(1 B))) v (‘(A &C>>>
(4 (((A + (1 A)) + B) + (A --, B))
Solution:
(a) +v -IA&BC~AIB
(b) v+A~-IB~JzAC
(c) +-+AlAB+AB
B.2. Find the statement forms whose transcriptions into Polish notation are
(u)+vA~B&HBCA (c) vlvAB&AB
(b) ++ABvllAB (d)vvAB-,CD
Solution:
(a) ((A v (1 B)) --* ((B * C) 6~A))
(b) ((A+B) -((l(lA))“B))
(4 ((1 (A ” B)) ” (A & B))
b-4 ((A ” 4 ” (C-+D))
195
196 PARENTHESIS-FREE NOTATION [APPENDIX B
B.3. Describe an algorithm for determining whether a given expression is a statement

form in Polish notation and for constructing the corresponding statement form in its
original notation.
Solution :
Assign the integer -1 to statement letters, 0 to 1, and +1 to the binary connectives &, v, +, t).
Then we have
Theorem: An expression A is a statement form in Polish notation if and only if
(I) the sum #(A) of the integers assigned to all the occurrences of symbols in A is -1;
(II) the sum #(B) of the integers assigned to all the occurrences of symbols in every
proper initial segment Bt of A is non-negative.
Example. v-,vABlB&lBC
-
2
-1
Proof of the Theorem. First, we shall prove that any statement form in Polish notation satisfies
conditions (I) and (II). This is shown by induction on the number k of occurrences of connectives
in A. If there are no connectives, A is a statement letter and conditions (I)-(II) are obvious.
(In this case there are no proper initial segments of A.) Now assume that the result has been
established for all statement forms having fewer than k occurrences of connectives (k 2 1). By our
new definition of statement form, A is of one of the forms 1 B, & BC, v BC, + BC, e BC, where
B and C are statement forms (having fewer than k occurrences of connectives). Use of the induc-
tive hypothesis now yields (I)-(II). (For instance, if A is & BC, then #(A) = 1 + #(B) + #(C) =
1 + (-1) + (-1) = -1, yielding (I). If D is a proper initial segment of A, then either D is & and
#t(D) is +l k 0; or D is &D, (where D, is a proper initial segment of B) and #(D) = 1 + #(D1) h
1 + 0 = 1 > 0; or D is &B and #(D) = 1 + #(B) = 1 + (-1) = 0; or D is & BC, (where C, is a proper
initial segment of C) and #(D) = 1 + #(B) + #(C,) = 1 + (-1) + #(C,) = 0 + #(C,) = #(C,) 2 0.)
Conversely, let us assume now that an expression A satisfies (I)-(II). We prove that A is a
statement form in Polish notation by induction on the number k of symbols in A. k = 1: then
by (I), A is a statement letter. Induction step: assume that k > 1 and that the result holds for
all expressions having fewer than k symbols. Case 1: A is of the form 1 B. It is then easy to
show that the truth of (I)-(II) for A implies the truth of (I)-(II) for B, and hence, by inductive
hypothesis, B is a statement form. Therefore 1 B is a statement form. Case 2: A is of the form
BC, where B is a statement letter. This contradicts (II), since B is a proper initial segment of A.
Case 3: A is of the form 0 C, where 0 is one of the binary connectives &, v, +, w. There must
be a shortest proper initial segment B of C such that #(B) = -1. For, as we move from left to
right in A, the sum of the symbols begins at +l (the integer for 0) and ends with -1 (= #(A)),
and moving from one symbol to the next either leaves the sum unchanged or changes it by 1-l or -1.
Hence we must finally arrive at the first proper initial segment of A whose sum is 0. This proper
initial segment is of the form ? ? B, where B is the shortest proper initial segment of C such that
#t(B) = -1. Then B satisfies (I). As for (II), consider any proper initial segment D of B. Then
+B is a proper initial segment of A if and only if A is of the form BC, where C contains at least one symbol.
APPENDIX B] PARENTHESIS-FREE NOTATION 197
since 0 D is a shorter proper initial segment of A than [7 B, #(l-J D) is > 0, and #(D) A 0. Hence
(II) holds for B, and, by inductive hypothesis, B is a statement form in Polish notation. Let C be
BE. Thus A is 0 BE. Since -1 = #(A) = 1 + #(B) + i?(E) = 1 + (-1) + #(E) = g(E), E satisfies (I).
As for (II), let F be any proper initial segment of E. Then 0 BF is a proper initial segment of A.
By (II) for A, 0 f #(O BF) = 1 + #(B) + #(F) = 1 + (-1) + #i(F) = #t(F). Thus (II) holds for E, and,
by inductive hypothesis, E is a statement form in Polish notation, and therefore so is ? ?BE.
Notice that the second part of the proof of the theorem gives a method for constructing the
corresponding statement form in our original notation (since it locates the statement forms out of
which our given statement form is constructed).
Example. -&A-~-IB-BvCB
The first proper initial segment whose sum is 0 is * & A 11 B. Thus we have (& A 11 B) @
(eB v CB). In &A 1-1 B, the first proper initial segment whose sum is 0 is &A. Hence we
obtain A & 11 B. In @B v CB, the first proper initial segment whose sum is 0 is @B, and we
obtain B t) (v CB). Thus, so far, (A & 1-1 B) f) (B @ (v CB)). Finally, v CB corresponds to
C v B, and the statement form in our original notation is (A & 1-1 B) e= (B t) (Cv B)).
B.4. Write the following statement forms in Polish notation.
(a) B&z l(AvB)
(b) [(A-+B)+ l(B+A)] * (A-B)
(c) [(A+B)+(C+D)] + [E+{(D-+A)+(C+A)}]
B.5. Determine whether each of the following expressions is a statement form in Polish notation, and,
if it is, find the corresponding statement form in our original notation.
(a) + 1 vAB++C& TAB
(b) -I &A+B+A
(c) vv++AB lAA&BA
k-l) --+A+BC+&ABC
The Axiom of Choice
Implies Zorn’s lemma
By the axiom of choice we mean the assertion that, for any set x, there is a function f
(called a choice function for x), defined on T(x) - {@}, such that, for any non-empty subset
u of x, f(u) E u.
We shall say that a collection A of sets is well-ordered by inclusion if and only if A is
an C-chain and every non-empty subset C of A has a least element b (i.e. if u E C, then
b cu). Given a collection A well-ordered by inclusion, and given any set y in A, the segment
determined by y (denoted Seg (A, y)) is defined to be the set of all x in A such that XC y.
Notice that, if S is a section of A (i.e. if S is a subset of A such that (y E S 6i x CY) + X ES))
and if S # A, then S = Seg (A, u), where u is the least element of A c S.
Theorem. The axiom of choice implies Zorn’s Lemma.

Proof.
union
Assume that a set Z of sets has the property
A2C A is also in 2. Let F be a choice function
that, for every c
-chain C in 2, the
for 2. Thus if $?IjP D CZ, then
F(D) ED.
Let us assume that 2 has no c-maximal element. We shall derive a contradiction from
this assumption.
For any y in 2, the set Y of all elements x of 2 such that y Cx is non-empty (since there
are no C-maximal elements). Let f(y) = F(Y). Thus for any y in 2, f(y) is an element of
2 such that yc f(y).
By a ladder we mean any subset L of Z such that L is well-ordered
for any x E L, f ( u E s$ .,u) = x. (By hypothesis, u
by inclusion, and,
we know that u E segu,,z) u E 2, since
Seg (L, x) is an C-chain.) ’
Let L be the set of all ladders.
(1) Given two different ladders L1 and Lz, we shall show that one of them is a segment of
the other. Let K be the set of all u E LlnL2 such that Seg (LI,u) = Seg (Lz, u).
Clearly, K is a section of both LI and Lz. Hence if K = L1 or K = LP, then one of ZI
or LZ is a segment of the other. Thus we must show that KC L1 and KC LZ do not
simultaneously hold. To this end, assume KC L1 and KC Lp. Let u1 be the least element
of LIN K, and let uz be the least element of LZ - K. Then Seg (Ll, UI) = K and
Seg (Lz, u2) = K. By definition of ladder,
Ul =
f (. E s2L,.Ul) uJ = f (u:, 4
and I.42 = u) = f(&u>

f( u Eseg
u(L2.112)
198
APPENDIX C] THE AXIOM OF CHOICE IMPLIES ZORN’S LEMMA 199 I
Hence u1 = u2 and Seg (L1, ul) = K = Seg (Lz, 24. Thus UI E K, which contradicts the
fact that ul E Ll- K.
(2) The union of all ladders H = L 2 L L1 is again a ladder. For, by (1) it is clear that H
is an c-chain. H is well-ordereld by inclusion. (In fact, if @ # W’G H and u E W, then
N E L1 for some L1 E L and the least element of Wn LI must be the least element of W.)
Finally, for any x E H, x E L1 for some LIE L, and, by (l), Seg(H,x) = Seg(L1, x).
Hence x = f(
uE &,,2) = f (u E s~~H,*,“~ *
Since H is an C-chain, the union
is a ladder, and therefore f(v) E H.
v = u ‘;;‘, u E 2, by hypothesis. Hence H U {f(v)}
It follows that f(v) c v, contradicting v c f(v). )

AppendixD
A lattice-Theoretic Proof
of the Schriider-Bernstein Theorem
Lemma. Let (L, 6) be a complete lattice and let + be a function from L into L such that
+ is order-preserving, i.e. x g y + 4(x) 6 4(g). Then + has a fixed point b in
L, i.e. +(b) = b.
Proof. Let W = {x : x E L & x’+(x)}, and let b = V x. We shall show that

ZEW
+(b) = b. First,4(b) is an upper bound of W. For, if x E W, x 4 b, and therefore 4(x) 6 +(b).

But since x E W, x 4 +(x). Hence x 6 4(b). Thus +(b) is an upper bound of W, and so
b = 3 yw x 4 +(b). On the other hand, since b 4 4(b), it follows that +(b) 5 +(4(b)), i.e.
+(b) E W. Hence +(b) 6 I yw x = b. From b 6 +(b) & +(b) 6 b we obtain +(b) = b. )
SchrZder-Bernstein Theorem. If there is a one-one correspondence f between X and a

subset of Y and a one-one correspondence g between Y and a subset of X, then
there is a one-one correspondence between X and Y. (In terms of cardinal num-
bersmandtt,ifm~nandn’m,then m=n.)
Proof. For every subset ZcX, let +(Z) = X - g[Y - f[Z]] (Fig. D-l). (Recall that,
for any function h, h[C] = {h(u) : u E C}.)
Fig. D-l Fig. D-2
Now, 21 c 22 --, f[Zl] cf[&] + Y - f[Z2] c Y w f[.G]
+ g[Y - f[Zz]] c g[Y - f [~a

+ x - g[Y - f [Zl]] c x - g[Y - f [Z2]1
--
dZ1) G2)
Hence 4 is an order-preserving function from the complete lattice (T(X), C) into itself.
Hence by the lemma above, + has a fixed point Z*, i.e.
z* = +(Z*) = x - g[Y - f[z*]]
Therefore g[Y-f[Z*]] = x-z*
It is easy now to verify, using Fig. D-2 as a guide, that the following function h,
f(x) if xEZ*
h(x) =
i g-l(x) if x E X-Z*
is a one-one correspondence between X and Y. )
200
Bibliography
The Bibliography is divided into two parts: the first on switching circuits, logic circuits
and minimization, the second on Boolean algebras and related areas.
I. SWITCHING CIRCUITS, LOGIC CIRCUITS AND MINIMIZATION

1. Adam, A.: Truth Functions and the Problem of their Realization by Two-terminal
Graphs, Akademiai Kiado, Budapest, 1968.
2. Adefio, S. A., and C. F. Nolan: Principles and Applications of Boolean Algebras for
Electronic Engineers, Iliffe Books, London, 1966.
3. Akers, S. B., Jr.: A Truth Table Method for the Synthesis of Combinational Logic
Circuits, IRETEC,+ EC-lo, 604-615, 1961.
4. Ashenhurst, R. L.: The Theory of Abstract Two-terminal Switching Networks,
Harvard Comp. Lab. BL-5, VII, 1-15, 1954.
5. Ashenhurst, R. L.: The Decomposition of Switching Functions, Proc. Int. Symp.
Theory of Switching, 1957, Annals, Harvard Comp. Lab., 1959.
6. Beatson, T. J.: Minimization of Components in Electronic Switching Circuits, AIEE,
I, Comm. and Electr., 77, 283-291, 1958.
7. Booth, T. M.: The Vertex-Frame Method for Obtaining Minimal Propositional-Letter
Formulas, IRETEC, Vol. EC-11, 144-154, 1962.
8. Calabi, L.: A Solution of the Minimization Problem for Boolean Formulas, Parke Math.
Lab. Rept. 7-3471, 1960.
9. Calabi, L.: Relations between Switching Networks and Boolean Formulas, Parke Math.
Lab. Rept. 8-2471, 1961.
10. Calabi, L., and J. A. Riley: Inessentiality in Minimal Networks and Formulas,
IRETEC, EC-11, 5, 711-713, 1962.
11. Calabi, L., and J. A. Riley: The Algebra of Boolean Formulas: Some Criteria for
Minimality, Proc. Third Ann. Symp. Switching Circuit Theory & Logical Design, S-141,
33-47, 1962.
12. Calabi, L., and E. W. Samson: On The Theory of Boolean Formulas: Minimal Including
Sums, I, J. Sot. Industr. Appl. Math., 11, 212-234, 1963.
13. Caldwell, S.: Switching Circuits and Logical Design, Wiley, New York, 1958.
14. Chang, D. M. Y., and T. H. Mott, Jr.: Computing Irredundant Normal Forms from
Abbreviated Presence Functions, IEEETEC, EC-14, 335-342, 1965.
15. Choudhury, A. K., and M. S. Basu: A Mechanized Chart for Simplification of Switch-
ing Functions, IRETEC, EC-11, 713-714, 1962.
+IRE stands for Institute of Radio Engineers, recently changed to Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers (IEEE). TEC stands for Transactions on Electronic Computers.
201
202 BIBLIOGRAPHY
16. Chu, J. T.: A Generalization of a Theorem of Quine for Simplifying Truth Functions,
IRETEC, EC-lo, 165168, 1961.
17. Cobham, A. R., R. Fridshal and J. North: Switching Circuit Theory & Logical Design,
Proc. 2nd Ann. Symp. Switching Theory & Logical Design, Detroit, AIEE, New York,
1961.
18. Curtis, H. A.: A New Approach to the Design of Switching Circuits, Van Nostrand,
Princeton, 1962.
19. Das, S. R., and A. K. Choudhury: Maxterm Type Expressions of Switching Functions
and their Prime Implication, IEEETEC, EC-14, 920-923, 1965.
20. Dietmeyer, D. L., and J. R. Duley: Generating Prime Implicants via Ternary Encoding
and Decimal Arithmetic, Comm. Assoc. Comp. Mach., 11, 520-523, 1968.
21. Dunham, B., and R. Fridshal: The Problem of Simplifying Logical Expressions,
J. Symb. Logic, 24, 17-19, 1959.
22. Flegg, H. G.: Boolean Algebra and its Applications, Wiley, New York, 1964.
23. Flores, I.: Logic of Computer Arithmetic, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., 1963.
24. Fridshal, R.: The Quine Algorithm, Summaries of Talks, Summer Inst. Symb. Logic,
Cornell, 211-212, 1957.
25. Ford, L. R., and D. R. Fulkerson: Flows in Networks, Princeton Univ., Princeton, 1962.
26. Ghazala, M. J.: Irredundant Disjunctive and Conjunctive Normal Forms of a Boolean
Function, IBM J. Res. and Dev., 1, 171-176, 1957.
27. Gimpel, J. F.: A Reduction Technique for Prime Implicant Tables, Proc. Fifth Ann.
Symp. Switching Circuit Theory & Logical Design, S-164, IEEE, 174-182, 1964.
28. Gimpel, J. F.: A Method of Producing a Boolean Function Having an Arbitrarily
Prescribed Prime Implicant Table, IEEETEC, EC-14, 3, 485-488, 1965.
29. Gimpel, J. F.: A Reduction Technique for Prime Implicant Tables, IEEETEC, EC-14,
4, 535-541, 1965.
30. Hall, F. B.: Boolean Prime Implicants by the Binary Sieve Method, AIEE Trans. I,
Comm. and Electr., 80, 709-713, 1962.
31. Hammer, P., and S. Rudeanu: Boolean Methods in Operations Research, Springer
Verlag, New York, 1968.
32. Harris, B.: An Algorithm for Determining Minimal Representations of a Logic Func-
tion, IRETEC, EC-6, 2, 103-108, 1957.
33. Harrison, M. A.: Introduction to Switching and Automata Theory, McGraw-Hill,

New York, 1965.
34. Hill, F. J., and G. R. Peterson: Introduction to Switching Theory and Logical Design,
Wiley, New York, 1968.
35. Hackney, R.: An Intersection Algorithm Giving All Irredundant Forms from a Prime
Implicant List, IEEETEC, EC-l& 2, 289-290, 1962.
36. Hoernes, G., and M. Heilweil: Introduction to Boolean Algebra and Logic Design,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1964.
37. Hohn, F. E.: Applied Boolean Algebra, Macmillan, New York, 1960.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 203
i
38. Hohn, F. E., and L. R. Schissler: Boolean Matrices in the Design of Combinational
Switching Circuits, Bell System Tech. J., 34, 177-202, 1955.
39. Holst, P. A.: Bibliography on Switching Circuits & Logical Algebra, IRETEC, EC-lo,
638-661, 1961.
40. House, R. W., and T. Rado: A Generalization of Nelson’s Algorithm for Obtaining
Prime Implicants, J. Symb. Logic, 30, B-12, 1965.
41. Hu, S. T.: Mathematical Theory of Switching Circuits & Automata, Univ. of Califor-
nia Press, Berkeley, 1968.
42. Karnaugh, M.: The Map Method for Synthesis of Combinational Logic Circuits, Trans.
AIEE, I, 72, 593-599, 1953.
43. Karp, R. M.: Functional Decomposition & Switching Circuit Design, J. Sot. Znd. Appl.
Math., 291-335, 1963.
44. Kautz, W. H.: A Survey & Assessment of Progress in Switching Theory & Logical
Design in the Soviet Union, IEEETEC, EC-15, 164-204, 1966.
45. Keister, W. A., A. Ritchie and S. Washburn: The Design of Switching Circuits,
Van Nostrand, Princeton, 1951.
46. Lawler, E. L.: An Approach to Multi-Level Boolean Minimization, J. Assoc. Comp.
Mach., 11, 283-295, 1964.
47. Lawler, E. L., and G. A. Salton: The Use of Parenthesis-Free Notation for the Auto-
matic Design of Switching Circuits, IRETEC, EC-g, 342-352, 1960.
48. Luccio, F.: A Method for the Selection of Prime Implicants, IEEETEC, EC-15, 2,
205-212, 1966.
49. Lupanov, 0. B.: On the Synthesis of Contact Networks, Doklady Akad. Nauk, USSR,
119, 1, 23-26, 1958 (Russian).
50. Lupanov, 0. B.: On Asymptotic Estimates of Complexities of Formulas which Realize
Functions of the Algebra of Logic, Ibid. 128, 3, 464-467, 1959 (Russian).
51. Lupanov, 0. B.: On Realization of Functions of the Algebra of Logic Using Formulas
of Limited Depth in the Basis of &, V, and -, Ibid., 136, 5, 1041-1042, 1961 (Russian).
52. Maley, G. A.: Simplifying Switching Circuits with Boolean Algebra, Electrotechnology,
67, 101-106, 1961.
53. Marcus, M.: Switching Circuits for Engineers, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N. J.,
1962.
54. McCluskey, E. J.: Minimization of Boolean Functions, Bell System Tech. J., 35,
1417-1444, 1956.
55. McCluskey, E. J.: Minimal Sums for Boolean Functions Having Many Unspecified
Fundamental Products, Proc. Second Ann. Symp. Switching Circuit Theory & Logical
Design, AIEE, 10-17, 1961.
56. McCluskey, E. J.: Introduction to the Theory of Switching Circuits, McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1965.
57. McCluskey, E. J., and T. C. Bartee: A Survey of Switching Circuit Theory, McGraw-
Hill, New York, 1962.
58. Meo, A. R.: On the Determination of the ps Maximal Implicants of a Switching Func-
tion, IEEETEC, EC-14, 6, 830-840, 1965.
204 BIBLIOGRAPHY
59. Mileto, F., and G. Putzolu: Average Values of Quantities Appearing in Boolean Func-
tion Minimization, IEEETEC, EC-13, 2, 87-92, 1964.
60. Mott, T. H., and C. C. Carroll: Numerical Procedures for Boolean Function Minimiza-
tion, IEEETEC, EC-13, 4, 470, 1964.
61. Mott, T. H.: Determination of the H-redundant Normal Forms of a Truth Function
by Iterated Consensus of the Prime Implicants, IRETEC, EC-g, 2, 245-252, 1960.
62. Moortgat, M. J.: Simplification of Boolean Functions, Gen. Electric Co. Tech. Informa-
tion Series R64CD18, Falls Church, Va., 1964.
63. Muller, D. E.: Application of Boolean Algebra to Switching Circuit Design and to
Error Detection, IRETEC, EC-3, 3, 6-12, 1954.
64. Muller, D. E.: Complexity in Electronic Switching Circuits, IRETEC, EC-5, 1, 15-19,
1956.
65. Nelson, R. J.: Weak Simplest Normal Truth Functions, J. Symbolic Logic, 20, 3,
232-234, 1955.
66. Nelson, R. J.: Simplest Normal Truth Functions, Ibid., 20, 2, 105-108, 1955.
67. Ninomiya, I A Study of the Structures of Boolean Functions and Applications to
the Synthesis of Switching Circuits, Mem. Faculty Eng. Nagoya Univ., 13, 2, 149-363,
1961.
68. Peterson, W. W.: Error-correcting Codes, Wiley, New York, 1961.
69. Petrick, S. R.: A Direct Determination of the Irredundant Forms of a Boolean Func-
tion from the Set of Prime Implicants, Air Force Cambridge Res. Center Tech. Report
56-110, April 1956.
70. Phister, M.: Logical Design of Digital Computers, Wiley, New York, 1958.
71. Prather, R. E.: Introduction to Switching Theory: A Mathematical Approach, Allyn
and Bacon, Boston, 1967.
72. Pyne, I. B., and E. J. McCluskey: An Essay on Prime Implicant Tables, J. Sot.
Industr. Appl. Math., 9, 604-631, 1961.
73. Pine, I. B., and E. J. McCluskey: The Reduction of Redundancy in Solving Prime
Implicant Tables, IRETEC, EC-11, 4, 473-482, 1962.
74. Quine, W. V.: The Problem of Simplifying Truth Functions, Amer. Math. Monthly,
59, 521-531, 1952.
75. Quine, W. V.: A Way to Simplify Truth Functions, Ibid., 62, 627-631, 1955.
76. Quine, W. V.: On Cores and Prime Implicants of Truth Functions, Ibid., 66, 755-760,
1959.
77. Quine, W. V.: Two Theorems about Truth Functions, Bol. Sot. Math. Mexicana, 10,
64-70, 1953.
78. Richards, R. K.: Arithmetic Operations in Digital Computers, Van Nostrand, Princeton,
1955.
79. Roth, J. P.: Algebraic Topological Methods for the Synthesis of Switching Systems,
I, Trans. Amer. Math. SOL, 88, 301-326, 1958.
80. Roth, J. P.: Algebraic Topological Methods in Synthesis, Proc. Int. Symp. on Theory
of Switching, Harvard Univ., 1959.
81. Rudeanu, S.: Axiomatization of Certain Problems of Minimization, Studia Logica,
20, 37-61, 1967.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 205
82. Samson, E. W., and B. E. Mills: Circuit Minimization: Algebra and Algorithm for
New Boolean Canonical Expressions, Air Force Cambridge Res. Center Tech. Report,
54-21, 1954.
83. Samson, E. W., and R. Mueller: Circuit Minimization: Minimal and Irredundant
Boolean Sums by Alternative Set Method, Air Force Cambridge Res. Center Tech.
Report, 55-109, 1955.
84. Scheinman, A. H.: A Method for Simplifying Boolean Functions, Bell System Tech. J.,
41, 4, 1337-1346, 1962.
85. Schubert, E. J.: The Relative Merits of Minimization Techniques for Switching
Circuits, IEEETEC, EC-12, 321-322, 1963.
86. Seshu, S., and M. B. Reed: Linear Graphs and Electrical Networks, Addison-Wesley,
Reading, Mass., 1961.
87. Semon, W.: Synthesis of Series-parallel Network Switching Functions, Bell System
Tech. J., 37, 4, 877-898, 1958.
88. Semon, W.: Matrix Methods in the Theory of Switching, Proc. Int. Symp. Switching
Theory, Harvard, 1959.
89. Shannon, C. E.: A Symbolic Analysis of Relay and Switching Circuits, Trans. Amer.
Inst. Electr. Eng., 57, 713-723, 1938.
90. Shannon, C. E.: The Synthesis of Two-terminal Switching Circuits, Bell System
Tech. J., 28, 59-98, 1949.
91. Torng, H. C.: Introduction to the Logical Design of Switching Systems, Addison-
Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1964.
92. Vasil’ev, Yu. L.: Minimal Contact Networks for Boolean Functions of Four Variables,
Doklady Akad. Nauk, USSR, 127,2, 2420245, 1959 (Russian).
93. Veitch, E. W.: A Chart Method for Simplifying Truth Functions, Proc, Assoc. Comp.
Mach., 127-133, 1952.
94. Washburn, S. H.: An Application of Boolean Algebra to the Design of Electronic
Switching Circuits, AIEE, I, Comm. & Electr., 72, 380-388, 1953.
95. Yablonskii, S. V.: The Algorithmic Difficulty of Synthesizing Minimal Switching
Circuits, Problems of Cybernetics, 2, 401-457, 1961 (Translated from Russian).
96. Zacharov, B.: Digital Systems Logic and Circuits, American Elsevier, New York,
1968.
97. %uravlev, Yu. I.: On Various Concepts of Minimality for Disjunctive Normal Forms,
Siberian Math. J., 1, 609-610, 1960 (Russian).
II. BOOLEAN ALGEBRA AND RELATED TOPICS

(Sikorski [1958] is the best and most authoritative text. Halmos [1963] is very stimulating.)
98. Birkhoff, G.: Lattice Theory, American Math Society Colloquium Publications XXV,
New York, 1940, Second Edition, 1948, 1961.
99. Birkhoff, G., and G. D. Birkhoff: Distributive Postulates for Systems like Boolean
Algebras, Trans. Amer. Math. Sot., 60, 3-11, 1946.
100. Birkhoff, G., and 0. Frink: Representation of Lattices by Sets, Trans. Amer. Math.
Sot. 64, 299-316, 1948.
101. Byrne, L.: Two Brief Formulations of Boolean Algebra, Bull. Amer. Math. Sot., 52,
269-272, 1946.
206 BIBLIOGRAPHY
102. Byrne, L.: Short Formulations of Boolean Algebra Using Ring Operations, Canadian
J. Math., 3, 31-33, 1951.
103. Chang, C. C.: On the Representation of a-complete Boolean Algebras, Trans. Amer.
Math. Sot., 85, 208-218, 1957.
104. Chang, C. C.: Algebraic Analysis of Many-valued Logics, Trans. Amer. Math. Sot.,
88, 467-490, 1958.
105. Cohn, P. M.: Universal Algebra, Harper & Row, New York, 1965.
106. Curry, H. B.: Foundations of Mathematical Logic, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1963.
107. Dilworth, R. P.: Lattices with Unique Complements, Trans. Amer. Math. Sot., 57,
123-154, 1954.
108. Dilworth, R. P.: Structure and Decomposition Theory of Lattices, Proc. Symp. Pure
Math., Lattice Theory, 3-16, 1961.
109. Dunford, N., and M. H. Stone: On the Representation Theorem for Boolean Algebras,
Rev. Ci. Lima, 43, 743-749, 1941.
110. Dwinger, P.: Introduction to Boolean Algebra, Wiirzburg, 1961.
111. Enomoto, S.: Boolean Algebras and Fields of Sets, Osaka Math. J., 5, 99-115, 1953.
112. Frink, 0.: Representations of Boolean Algebras, Bull. Amer. Math. Sot., 47, 755-756,
1941.
113. Gardner, M.: Logic Machines and Diagrams, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1958.
114. Goodstein, R. L.: Boolean Algebra, Pergamon, Oxford, 1963.
115. Halmos, P. R.: Algebraic Logic, Chelsea, New York, 1962.
116. Halmos, P. R.: Lectures on Boolean Algebras, Van Nostrand, 1963.
117. Henkin, L.: La Structure Algebrique des Theories Mathematiques, Gauthier-Villars,
Paris, 1956.
118. Henkin, L., and A. Tarski: Cylindric Algebras, Proc. Symp. Pure Math. II, Lattice
Theory, 83-133, 1961.
119. Hermes, H.: Einfiihrung in die Verbandstheorie, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1955.
120. Horn, A., and A. Tarski: Measures in Boolean Algebras, Trans. Amer. Math. SOC.,
64, 467-497, 1948.
121. Huntington, E. V.: Sets of Independent Postulates for the Algebra of Logic, Trans.
Amer. Math. Sot., 5, 288-309 (1904).
122. Huntington, E. V.: New Sets of Independent Postulates for the Algebra of Logic,
Trans. Amer. Math. Sot., 35, 274-304, 557-558, 971, 1933.
123. Jonsson, B.: A Boolean Algebra without Proper Automorphisms, Proc. Amer. Math.
Sot., 2, 766-770, 1951.
124. Jonsson, B., and A. Tarski: Boolean Algebras with Operators, Amer. J. of Math.,
(I) 73, 891-939, 1951; (II) 74, 127-162, 1952.
125. Karp, C. R.: A Note on the Representation of n-complete Boolean Algebras, Proc.
Amer. Math. Sot., 14, 705-707, 1963.
126. Kolmogorov, A. N.: Foundations of the Theory of Probability, Chelsea, New York,
1950.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 207
127. Kripke, S.: An Extension of a Theorem of Gaifman-Hales-Solovay, Fund. Math., 61,

29-32, 1967.
128. Kuratowski, K., and A. Mostowski: Set Theory, North Holland, Amsterdam, 1968.
129. LeVeque, W. G.: Topics in Number Theory, Vol. I, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.,
1956.
130. Loomis, L. H.: On the Representation of o-complete Boolean Algebras, Bull. Amer.
Math. Sot., 53, 757-760, 1947.
131. MacNeille, H.: Partially Ordered Sets, Trans. Amer. Math. Sot., 42, 416-460, 1937.
132. McKinsey, J. C. C., and A. Tarski: The Algebra of Topology, Ann. of Math., 45,
141-191, 1944.
133. McKinsey, J. C. C., and A. Tarski: On Closed Elements in Closure Algebras, Ann. of
Math., 47, 122-162, 1946.
134. McKinsey, J. C. C., and A. Tarski: Some Theorems about the Sentential Calculi of
Lewis and Heyting, J. Symb. Logic, 13, l-15, 1948.
135. Mendelson, E.: In.troduction to Mathematical Logic, Van Nostrand, Princeton. 1964.
136. Mostowski, A.: Abzahlbare Boolesche Korper und ihre Anwendungen auf die allge-
meine Metamathematik, Fund. Math., 29, 34-53, 1937.
137. Nachbin, L.: Une propriete caracteristique des algebres booleiennes, Portugal Math.,
6, 115-118, 1947.
138. Neumann, J., von, and M. H. Stone: The Determination of Representative Elements
in the Residual Classes of a Boolean Algebra, Fund. Math., 25, 353-376, 1935.
139. Newman, M. H. A.: A Characterization of Boolean Lattices and Rings, J. London
Math. Sot., 16, 256-272, 1941.
140. Pierce, R. S.: Distributivity in Boolean Algebras, Pacific J. Math., 7, 983-992, 1957.
141. Pierce, R. S.: Introduction to the Theory of Abstract Algebras, Holt, New York, 1968.
142. Rasiowa, H., and R. Sikorski: The Mathematics of Metamathematics, Polish Academy
of Sciences, Monografie Matematyczne, Warsaw, 1963.
143. Rieger, L.: Algebraic Methods of Mathematical Logic, Academic Press, New York,
1967.
144. Rosenbloom, P.: The Elements of Mathematical Logic, Dover, New York, 1950.
445. Rudeanu, S.: Boolean Equations and their Applications to the Study of Bridge
Circuits, I, Bull. Math. Sot. Math. Phys. R.P. R., 3, 447-473, 1959.
146. Scott, D.: The Independence of Certain Distributive Laws in Boolean Algebras,
Trans. Amer. Math. Sot., 84, 258-261, 1957.
147. Sikorski, R.: On the Representation of Boolean Algebras as Fields of Sets, Fund.
Math., 35, 247-258, 1948.
148. Sikorski, R.: Boolean Algebras, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1958; 2nd Edition, 1964.
149. Smith, E. C., and A. Tarski: Higher Degrees of Distributivity and Completeness in
Boolean Algebras, Trans. Amer. Math. Sot., 84, 230-257, 1957.
150. Stabler, E. R.: Boolean Representation Theory, Amer. Math. Monthly, 51, 129-132,
1944.
208 BIBLIOGRAPHY
151. Stone, M. H.: The Theory of Representations for Boolean Algebras, Trans. Amer.
Math. Sot., 40, 37-111, 1936.
152. Stone, M. H.: Applications of the Theory of Boolean Rings to General Topology,
Trans. Amer. Math. Sot., 41, 321-364, 1937.
153. Stone, M. H.: The Representation of Boolean Algebras, Bull. Amer. Math. Sot., 44,
807-816, 1938.
154. Szasz, G.: Zntroduction to Lattice Theory, Academic Press, New York, 1963.
155. Tarski, A.: Zur Grundlegung der Boole’schen Algebra I, Fund. Math. 24, 177-198,
1935.
156. Tarski, A.: Der Aussagenkalkiil und die Topologie, Fund. Math. 31, 103-134, 1938.
157. Tarski, A.: Cardinal Algebras, Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 1949.
158. Tarski, A.: A Lattice-Theoretical Fixed-Point Theorem and its Applications, Pacific
J. Math., 5, 285-310, 1955.
INDEX
Abbreviated truth table, 6 Chain, 166

Absorption laws, 11 Choice function, 198
Adequate systems of connectives, 15 Circuit, bridge, 74
Adjacent squares, 98, 99,102,106 Circuit, logic, 75-76
Algebra, Boolean, 52 Circuit, multiple output logic, 78
Byrne, 140 Circuit, series-parallel, 72
dual, 170 Circuit simplification, 72
free, 186 Circuit, switching, 71
pseudo-Boolean, 182 Class, 30
quotient, 147 Clopen, 170
cr-, 153 Closure operation, 188
simple, 166 Cnf, 22
Algebra of logic, 1 full, 22
Algebra of sets, 30 Column, dominant, 90
and Boolean algebra, 69 Commutativity, 11, 32
and propositional logic, 37 Complement, 35, 53
Alternative denial, 17 Complemented lattice, 135
And, 1 Complete Boolean algebra, 149
And-gate, 75 field of sets, 150
Antecedent, 3 ideal, 187
Argument, correct, 25 lattice, 181
Association to the left, 5 Completely distributive, 152
Associativity, 11, 32 Composite mapping, composition, 62
Assumptions, consistent, 25 Condition, don’t care, 82
Atom, 135 Conditional, 2
Atomic, 135 Congruence relation, 166
Conjunct, 11
Biconditional, 3 Conjunction, 1
Binary number system, 77 fundamental, 12
Boolean algebra, 52 Conjunctive normal form, 22
and propositional logic, 63 full, 22
and the algebra of sets, 69 Connectedness, 59
atomic, 135 Connective, 4
complete, 149 principal, 6
free, 186 Connectives, adequate system of, 15
pseudo-, 182 Consensus, 94
simple, 166 method, 94
Boolean expression, 60 Consequent, 3
Boolean function, 60 Consistent assumptions, 25
Boolean method, 91 Contradiction, 8
Boolean Representation Theorem, 148-149 Contrapositive, 11
Boolean ring, 139 Conventions for omitting parentheses, 5
. Boolean space, 170 Core, 89
Bound, greatest lower, 59 operation, 89
Bound, least upper, 59 secondary, 94
Bound, lower, 59
Correct argument, 25
Bound, upper, 59
Correspondence, one-one, 38
Branching method, 93
Countable chain condition, 189
Bridge circuit, 74
Countable set, 39
Brouwerian lattice, 182
Bundle, statement, 53
Byrne algebra, 140 De Morgan’s Laws, 11, 150
Denial, 1
Calculus, propositional, 1 alternative, 17
Cantor’s Theorem, 47 joint, 18
Carry digit, 78 Denumerable set, 39
Cartesian product, 18’7 Diagram, Venn, 34
209
210 INDEX
Difference, 34 Homomorphic image, 168

symmetric, 34,137 Homomorphism, 168
Digit, sum, 78 join-, 181
carry, 78 lattice-, 181
Disjoint, 33 meet-, 181
Disjunct, 11 order-, 181
Disjunction, 2
fundamental, 22 Ideal, 143
Disjunctive normal form complete, 187
(propositional logic), 12 maximal, 145
(Boolean algebra), 61 prime, 145
full, 14 principal, 144
Distributive lattice, 134 proper, 143
Distributive laws, 11, 33 ring-theoretic, 167
Distributivity, infinite, 151-152 Idempotence, 11, 32, 54
complete, 152 If and only if, 3
Dnf, 12 If-then, 2
irredundant, 85 Implicant, prime, 84
minimal, 84 Implication, logical, 9
Dominant column operation, 90 Inclusion of fundamental conjunctions, 12
Dominated row operation, 90 of sets, 31
Don’t care condition, 82 Inclusion, proper, 31
Double negation, law of, 11 Inclusive “or” 92
Dual (propositional calculus), 26 Independent axiom, 164
(Boolean algebra), 54 Infinite distributivity, 151
Dual algebra, 170 meets and joins, 149
Duality Principle (Boolean), 54, 151 set, 39
Intersection, 33, 66 (footnote)
Element, 30 Inverse (in a lattice), 135
Equality of sets, 31 Inverse mapping, 62
Equivalence class, 146 Inverter, 76
Equivalence, logical, 9 Irredundant, 85
Exclusive “or”, 2, 4 Irreflexive, 58
Expression, Boolean, 60 Isomorphic, 63
Isomorphism, 62, 168
Field of sets, 39
complete, 150
Join, 53
Filter, 166
homomorphism, 181
Finite set, 39
infinite, 149
Form, disjunctive normal, 12, 61
Joint denial, 18
conjunctive normal, 22, 68
statement, 4
Free Boolean algebra, 186 Karnaugh map, 98
Free set of generators, 186 with don’t care conditions, 106
Full adder, 79 Kernel, 168
Full cnf, 22
Full dnf, 14 Ladder, 198
Function, 38 Lattice, 133
Boolean, 60 Brouwerian, 182
from A into B, 38 complemented, 135
from A onto B, 38 complete, 181
one-one, 38 distributive, 134
Fundamental conjunction, 12 homomorphism, 181
Fundamental disjunction, 22 modular, 156
relatively pseudo-complemented, 182
Gate, and-, 75 Law of double negation, 11
or-, 75 Law, Poretzky’s, 70
Generated subalgebra, 66 Laws, absorption, 11
Generators, 186 De Morgan’s, 11, 150
Glb, 59 distributive, 11, 33
Greatest lower bound, 59 Left-open interval, 50
Letter, statement, 4
Half-adder, 79 Linear order, 59
INDEX 211
Literal, 12 Pair, ordered, 38

Logic, algebra of, 1 unordered, 30
Logic circuit, 75-76 Parentheses, 5
multiple output, 78 omission of, 5, 190
Logical implication, 9 Partial order, 58
equivalence, 9 Partition, 183
Loomis Representation Theorem, 178 Polish notation, 195
Lower bound, 59 Poretzky’s Law, 70
greatest, 59 Prime ideal, 145
Lub, 59 Prime implicant, 84
Principal connective, 6
Map, Karnaugh, 98 ideal, 144
Maximal ideal, 145 Proper ideal, 143
theorem, 148 inclusion, 31
McCluskey-Quine method, 86 subset, 31
m-complete, 153 Propositional calculus, 1
m-distributive, 152 Propositional logic and the algebra of sets, 37
Measure, non-trivial finitely additive, 185 Boolean algebra, 63
two-valued, 185 Pseudo-Boolean algebra, 182
Meet, 53
homomorphism, 181 Quine-McCluskey method, 86
infinite, 149 Quotation marks, 2 (footnote)
Member, 30 Quotient algebra, 147
Method, Boolean, 91
branching, 93 Rank (of a connective), 190
consensus, 94 Reflexive partial order, 58
Quine-McCluskey, 86 Regular, 174
Minimal dnf, 84 open algebra, 175
Minimal dnf or cnf, 107 Relatively pseudo-complemented lattice, 182
Minimization problem, 80 Replacement theorem, 10
(m, n)-distributive, 152 Representation theorem
Modular lattice, 156 (Stone, Boolean), 148-149
Multiple output logic circuit, 156 (Loomis), 178
Ring, 138
Boolean, 139
Negation, 1
commutative, 138
law of double, 11
Ring-theoretic ideal, 167
Normal form, disjunctive, 12, 61
Row, dominated, 90
conjunctive, 22, 68
Null set, 31
Schroder-Bernstein Theorem, 200
Number of elements in a finite set, 40
Secondary core, 94
Number of subsets, 32
Section, 198
Numbers, binary, 77
Segment, 198
Series-parallel circuit, 72
Omission of parentheses, 5,190 Set, 30
One-one function, 38 finite, infinite, denumerable, countable, 39
correspondence, 38 null, 31
Operation, 52 universal, 35
closure, 188 Sets, algebra of, 30
core, 89 field of, 39
dominant-column, 90 Sheffer stroke, 18
dominated row, 90 o-algebra, 153
truth-functional, 1, 4 a-subalgebra, u-homomorphism, o-ideal,
Or, 2 o-subfield, 177
exclusive, 2, 4 Simple Boolean algebra, 166
inclusive, 2 Simple order, 59
Order, partial, 58 Simplification of circuits, 72
homomorphism, 181 Singleton, 30
total (simple, linear), 59 Space, Boolean, 170
Ordered pairs, 39 Stone, 170
n-tuples, 45 Statement bundle, 53
Or-gate, 75 form, 4
Output, multiple, 78 letter, 4
INDEX
Stone’s Representation Theorem, 149 Total order, 59

Stone space, 170 Trivially true conditional, 3
Stroke, Sheffer, 18 Truth-functional operations, 1, 4
Subalgebra, 56 Truth table, 1, 6
generated, 66 abbreviated, 6
Sublattice, 157 Truth value, 1
Subset, 31
proper, 31 Ultrafilter, 166
Subsets, number of, 32 Union, 32
Sum digit, 78 Uniqueness of the complement, 53
Superfluous, 85 Unit (of a lattice), 134
Switch (closed, open), 71 Unit element (of a Boolean algebra), 53
Switches (in parallel, in series), 71 (of a ring), 138
Switching circuit, 71 Universal set, 35
Symmetric difference, 34, 137 Universe, 35
System, binary number, 77 Unordered pair, 30
adequate, 15 Upper bound, 59
least, 59
Table, truth, 1, 6
Tautology, 7 Venn diagram, 34
Theorem, Replacement, 10
Loomis Representation, 178 Well-ordered by inclusion, 198
Maximal Ideal, 148
SchrGder-Bernstein, 200 Zero (of a lattice), 134
Stone’s Boolean Representation, 148-149 Zero element (of a Boolean algebra), 53
Totally disconnected, 170 Zorn’s Lemma, 148,198
Index of Symbols and Abbreviations
1 1 dnf 12
& 1 cnf 22
V 2, 52, 133 (2: x . ..> 30
-3 3 Incl (i)-(iii) 31
3 PI(i)-(iv) 31
4 U(i)-(vi) 32
17 Int (i)-(vi) 33
18 Dist (i)-(ii) 33
30 D(i)-(iv) 34
31 SD(i)-(iii) 35
31 C(i)-(xi) 35
31 (PO l)-(PO 3) 58
32,53 (Conn) 59
32 CL) 60
33 (L4) 133
34,64 Gen (C) 144
A 34
A 35
(% Y) 38
#(A) 40
A 52,133
0 52
1 52
5 57
58
; 61
I-I 68
0& 75
0
V 75
0
1 76
8 78
C 78
JU 144
%f,J 147
V 149
A 149
Kf 168
213
1SCHAUM’S
1
OUTLINE SERIES j
,
COLLEGE PHYSICS FINITE MATHEMATICS LAGRANGIAN DYNAMICS

including 625 SOLVED PROBLEMS including 750 SOLVED PROBLEMS including 275 SOLVED PROBLEMS
Edited by CAREL W. “on der MERWE, Ph.D., By SEYMOUR LIPSCHUTZ, Ph.D., By D. A. WELLS, Ph.D.,
Professor of Physics, New York University Assoc. Prof. of Moth., Temple Univerrity Professor of Physics, Universify of Cfncinnafi
COLLEGE GHEMISTRY MODERN ALGEBRA STRENGTH OF MATERIALS

including 425 SOLVED PROBLEM5 including 430 SOLVED PROBLEMS
including 385 SOLVED PROBLEMS
By FRANK AYRES, Jr., Ph.D., By WILLIAM A. NASH, Ph.D.,
Edited by JEROME 1. ROSENBERG, Ph.D., Professor of Eng. Mechontcs, Universily of Florida
Professor of Chemistry, University of Pittsburgh Professor of Molhemol,cs, Dickinson College
LINEAR ALGEBRA FLUID MECHANICS and HYDRAULICS

GENETICS including 475 SOLVED PROBLEMS
including 500 SOLVED PROBLEMS including 600 SOLVED PROBLEMS
By RANALD V. GILES, B.S., M.S. in C.E.,
By WILLIAM D. STANSFIELD, Ph.D., By SEYMOUR LIPSCHUTZ, Ph.D., Prof. of Civil Engineering, Drexel Inst. of Tech.
of Moth.,
wept. of BiologicofSciences,Colif. State Polyfech. Assoc. Prof. Temple Universify
FLUID DYNAMICS
MATNEMATICAL HANDBOOK MATRICES including 100 SOLVED PROBLEMS
including 340 SOLVED PROBLEMS By WILLIAM F. HUGHES, Ph.D.,
includina 2400 FORMULAS and 60 TABLES
By FRANK AYRES, Jr., Ph.D., Professor of Mech. Eng., Carnegie Inst. of Tech.
By MURRAY R. SPIEGEL, Ph.D., Professor of Molhemolics, College
Professor of Moth., Rensselaer Polytech. Inst.
Dickinson and JOHN A. BRIGHTON, Ph.D.,
Asst. Prof. of Mech. Eng., Pennsylvania Slate U.
PROJECTIVE GEOMETRY
First Yr. COLLEGE MATHEMATICS ELECTRIC CIRCUITS
By FRANK AYRES, Jr., Ph.D.,
By FRANK AYRES, Jr.. Ph.D., Professor of Mothemofics, Dickinson College By JOSEPH A. EDMINISTER,M.S.E.E.,
Professor of Mofhemotics, Dickinson College Assoc. Prof. of Elec. Eng., University of Akron
GENERAL TOPOLOGY
COLLEGE ALGEBRA ELECTRONIC CIRCUITS
By SEYMOUR LIPSCHUTZ, Ph.D.,
By MURRAY R. SPIEGEL, Ph.D., Assoc. Prof. of Moth., Temple University By EDWIN C. LOWENBERG, Ph.D.,
Professor of Moth., Rensselaer Polyfech. Insf. Professor of Elec. Eng., Universify of Nebmska
GROUP THEORY FEEDBACK & CONTROL SYSTEMS

TRIGONOMETRY including 600 SOLVED PROBLEMS including 680 SOLVED PROBLEMS
includinq 680 SOLVED PROBLEMS By 8. BAUMSLAG, B. CHANDLER, Ph.D., By J. J. DiSTEFANO Ill, A. R. STUBBERUD,
By FRANK AYRES,>r., Ph.D., ,Uo,hemotics Dept., New York University
Professor of Mothemofics, DickinsonCollege and 1. J. WILLIAMS, Ph.D.,
Engineering Dep~.;Univsrsify of Colif., at L.A.
VECTOR ANALYSIS
MATHEMATICS OF FINANCE including 480 SOLVED PROBLEMS TRANSMISSION LINES
including 500 SOLVED PROBLEMS By MURRAY R. SPIEGEL, Ph.D., including 165 SOLVED PROBLEMS
By FRANK AYRES, Jr., Ph.D., Professor of Moth., Rensselaer Polytech. Inst. By R. A. CHIPMAN, Ph.D.,
Professor o%%ofhemolics, Dickinson College Professor of Electrical Eng., University of Toledo
ADVANCED CALCULUS
PROBABILITY including 925 SOLVED PROBLEMS REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGN
including 500 SOLVED PROBLEMS By MURRAY R. SPIEGEL, Ph.D., including 200 SOLVED PROBLEMS
By SEYMOUR LIPSCHUTZ, Ph.D., Professor of Moth., Rensselaer Polyfech. Insf. By N. J. EVERARD, MSCE, Ph.D.,
Assoc. Prof. of Moth., Temple Univerrify Prof. of Eng. Mech. EL Sfruc., Arlington Slate Cal.
COMPLEX VARIABLES and J. L. TANNER III, MSCE,

STATISTICS including 640 SOLVED PROBLEMS
Technical Consultont, Texas Industries Inc.
including 875 SOLVED PROBLEMS By MURRAY R. SPIEGEL, Ph.D., MECHANICAL VIBRATIONS

By MURRAY R. SPIEGEL, Ph.D., Professor of Mofh., Rensselaer Palytech. Inst.
Professor of Moth., Rensselosr Polyfoch. Insl. including 225 SOLVED PROBLEMS
LAPLACE TRANSFORMS By WILLIAM W. SETO, B.S. in M.E., M.S.,
Assoc. Prof. of Merh. Eng,, Son Jose Store College
ANALYTIC GEOMETRY including 450 SOLVED PROBLEMS
includina 345 SOLVED PROBLEMS By MURRAY R. SPIEGEL, Ph.D., MACHINE DESIGN
Professor of Moth., Rensselaer
By JOSEPH H. KINDLE, Ph.D., Polytech. Inst.
Professor of Mofhemofics,Universily of Cincinnati
By HALL, HOLOWENKO, LAUGHLIN
NUMERICAL ANALYSIS Professors of Mechanical Eng., Purdue University
DIFFERENTIAL GEOMETRY including 775 SOLVED PROBLEMS
including 500 SOLVED PROBLEMS By FRANCIS SCHEID, Ph.D., BASIC ENGINEERING EQUATIPNS
Professor of Molhemotics, Bosfon University
By MARTIN LIPSCHUTZ, Ph.D., including 1400 BASIC EQUATIONS
Professor of Molhemaiics,University of Bridgeport By W. F. HUGHES, E. W. GAYLORD, Ph.D.,
DESCRIPTIVE GEOMETRY Professors of Mach. Eng., Comegie Inst. of Tech.
CALCULUS including 175 SOLVED PROBLEMS

including 1175 SOLVED PROBLEM5 By MINOR C. HAWK, Heod of ELEMENTARY ALGEBRA
of Tech.
By FRANK AYRES, Jr., Ph.D.,
Engineering Graphics Dept., Carnegie Inst.
Professor of Mathematics, Dickinson College By BARNETT RICH, Ph.D.,
ENGINEERING MECHANICS Head of Math. Dept., Brooklyn Tech. H.S.
DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS including 460 SOLVED PROBLEMS

By W. G. MCLEAN, B.S. in E.E., MS., PLANE GEOMETRY
including 560 SOLVED PROBLEMS Professor of Mechanics, lofoyefte College including 850 SOLVED PROILEMS
By FRANK AYRES, Jr., Ph.D., and E. W. NELSON, B.S. in M.E., M. Adm. E., By BARNETT RICH, Ph.D.,
Professor of Mothemotics, Dickinson College
Engineering Supervisor, Western Electric Co. Head of Moth. Dept., Brooklyn Tech. H.S.
SET THEORY and Related Topics THEORETICAL MECHANICS TEST ITEMS IN EDUCATION
including 530 SOLVED PROBLEMS including 720 SOLVED PROBLEMS including 3100 TEST ITEMS
By SEYMOUR LIPSCHUTZ, Ph.D., By MURRAY R. SPIEGEL, Ph.D., By G. J.MOULY,Ph.D., L. E. WALT0N.Ph.D..
Assoc. Prof. of Moth., Temple Universi)y Professor of Moth., Rensselaer Polylech. Inst. Professors of Education, University of Miomf

Book Shaums BooleanAlgebraMendelson

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Book Shaums BooleanAlgebraMendelson

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Book Shaums BooleanAlgebraMendelson

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SCHAUM’S OUTLlNE OF

THEORY AND PROBLEMS

ELLIOTT MENDELSON, Ph.D.

SCHAUM’S OUTLINE SERIES

1234567890 SHSH 7543210

Queens College ELLIOTT MENDELSON

1.1 Truth-Functional Operations ............................................ 1

Chapter 2 THE ALGEBRA OF SETS

2.1 Sets .................................................................. 30

Chapter 3 BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS

3.1 Operations ............................................................ 52

4.1 Switching Circuits ...................................................... 71

4.4 Logic Circuits ........................................................ 75

4.5 The Binary Number System ........................................... 77

4.6 Multiple Output Logic Circuits .......................................... 78

4.7 Minimization .......................................................... 80

4.12 Prime Implicant Tables ................................................ 90

Chapter 5 TOPICS IN THE THEORY OF BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS

5.1 Lattices .............................................................. 133

Appendix A ELIMINATION OF PARENTHESES ....................................... 190

Appendix B PARENTHESIS-FREE NOTATION ........................................ 195

Appendix C THE AXIOM OF CHOICE IMPLIES ZORN’S LEMMA .................... 1%

Appendix D A LATTICE-THEORETIC PROOF OF THE SCHRijDER-BERNSTEIN THEOREM 200

BlBLlOGRAPHY ........................................................ 201

INDEX.. ............................................................... 209

INDEX OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS ........................... 213

The Algebra of logic

1.1 TRUTH-FUNCTIONAL OPERATIONS

A + B is F when and only when A is T and B is F.,

A proposition A --, B is T whenever A is F, irrespective of the truth value of B. Notice

A proposition of the form A t, B is called a biconditional. Notice that A t) B always takes

possible binary truth-functional operations.

1.3 STATEMENT FORMS

((l(l@&C))) v (1‘4)) ll(A&C)v 1A

((A v ( -9) 81 (C 8~ ( 1A))) (Av IB) & (C&z -IA)

(((A v t-14) 8~ C) & (1A)) (Av-IB)&C& 1A

((1A) + (B -+ t-164 v C)))) lA+(B+ l(AvC))

More far-reaching conventions for omitting parentheses are presented in Appendix A.

1.5 TRUTH TABLES

B C B&C A v (B KzC) (A v (B 13%

Abbreviated Truth Tables

There is a way of abbreviating truth tables so as to make the computations shorter.

Then the negation is handled:

followed by the disjunction

and, finally, the biconditional

1.6 TAUTOLOGIES AND CONTRADICTIONS

Example 1.8. A + A is a tautology.

Example 1.9. A v IA is a tautology.

Example 1.10. (A v B) H (B v A) is a tautology.

Example 1.11. [A & (B v C)] c) [(A &B) v (A &C)] is a tauto1ogy.t

B C BvC A & (B v C) A&B A&C (A&B)v(A&C)

Proof of Theorem 1 .l. K determines a truth-function f(A, B, C, . . .) which always takes

A contradiction is a statement form which always takes the value F. Hence A is a

Example 1.13. A & 1A is a contradiction.

Example 1.14. A * 1A is a contradiction.

Example 1.15. (A v B) & 1A & 1 B is a contradiction.

/B 1 1AI -II? i IAvRj&e.A t (AvR\&IA&-IR

1.7 LOGICAL IMPLICATION AND EQUIVALENCE

Example 1.16. A logically implies A.

Example 1.18. A & B logically implies A.