I’m familiar with it. Mmm. How would I explain it?
Example: 3(4 + 5) is the same as 3(4) + 3(5). The 3 can be distributed to each part of the expression in the parentheses.
For the logical operators “and” and “or”:
a&(b|c) = a & b | a & c
in english: a and (b or c) is the same as “a and b or a and c”, The a and got distributed to b or c. Hmmm. This makes sense. The expression is saying that it needs to be a and b or c. Since its b or c that works with a and. Its the same as a and b or a and c.
a|(b&c) = a|b & a|c
in english: a or (b and c) is the same as “a or b” and “a or c”. That makes sense. “a” or “b and c” have to be true is the same as “a or b” has to be true and “a or c” has to be true.
Kk.
a ∧ (a ∨ b) ≣ a
a b =
T T T
T F T
F T F
F F F
Ok.
This one makes no sense.
a and T = T. This is wrong. If a is false then F and T = F, if a is true then T and T = T.
a or F = F. This is wrong. If a is false then F or F = F, if a is true then T or F = T.
I think they meant to say that a and’ed with T will always output a. input a, output a . Identity.
Same for or. I think they meant to say that a or’ed with F will always output a.
Domination Law looks fine.
Idempotent Law looks fine.
Double Negation Law looks fine.
Commutative and Associative look fine.
De Morgan looks fine.
Absorption and Negation look fine.
So far as everything there is mentioned I’m familiar with sets at a basic level.
Ok.