Xref: utzoo sci.math:5776 rec.puzzles:2884 comp.lsi:654 sci.electronics:5290
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!apple!vsi1!wyse!mips!mark
From: mark@mips.COM (Mark G. Johnson)
Newsgroups: sci.math,rec.puzzles,comp.lsi,sci.electronics
Subject: Re: The 3 inverter problem
Message-ID: <13652@obiwan.mips.COM>
Date: 21 Feb 89 21:22:09 GMT
References: <13619@obiwan.mips.COM> <36205@bbn.COM>
Reply-To: mark@mips.COM (Mark G. Johnson)
Organization: MIPS Computer Systems, Sunnyvale, CA
Lines: 18

In article <36205@bbn.COM> cosell@BBN.COM (Bernie Cosell) writes:
> ... The thing that is amusing was [I think
>Minsky's] observation about the followon conclusion -- it is clear that if
>you can invert three signals with two inverters, you can invert *ANY*NUMBER*
>of signals with just.... TWO inverters.  Spoiler follows....
>Build the above box with two inverters.  Use two of its inputs as the
>inverters to build another such box, use the third input to invert one
>of your signals.
>Continue bootstrapping more three-out-of-two boxes until you've generated
>enough "spares" to invert all of your real signals....
>

But does this form a path with feedback?  Does it accidentally produce a
latch?  an oscillator?
-- 
 -- Mark Johnson	
 	MIPS Computer Systems, 930 E. Arques, Sunnyvale, CA 94086
	...!decwrl!mips!mark	(408) 991-0208