Here we show that regular languages are closed under complement, in that if L is a regular language, then L' (the set of all strings not in L) is also regular. We prove this by considering a DFA for L, then trying to construct a DFA for L' by swapping the final and non-final states. <br /><br />Contribute:<br />Patreon: <a href="https://www.patreon.com/easytheory" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.patreon.com/easytheory</a><br />Discord: <a href="https://discord.gg/SD4U3hs" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://discord.gg/SD4U3hs</a><br /><br />Live Streaming (Saturdays, Sundays 2PM GMT):<br />Twitch: <a href="https://www.twitch.tv/easytheory" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.twitch.tv/easytheory</a><br />(Youtube also)<br />Mixer: <a href="https://mixer.com/easytheory" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://mixer.com/easytheory</a><br /><br />Social Media:<br />Facebook Page: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/easytheory/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.facebook.com/easytheory/</a><br />Facebook group: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/easytheory/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.facebook.com/groups/easytheory/</a><br />Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/EasyTheory" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/EasyTheory</a><br /><br />Merch:<br />Language Hierarchy Apparel: <a href="https://teespring.com/language-hierarchy?pid=2&cid=2122" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://teespring.com/language-hierarchy?pid=2&cid=2122</a><br />Pumping Lemma Apparel: <a href="https://teespring.com/pumping-lemma-for-regular-lang" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://teespring.com/pumping-lemma-for-regular-lang</a><br /><br />If you like this content, please consider subscribing to my channel: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3VY6RTXegnoSD_q446oBdg?sub_confirmation=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3VY6RTXegnoSD_q446oBdg?sub_confirmation=1</a><br /><br />▶ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS◀<br />1. Are finite languages closed under complement?<br />2. What else about a DFA guarantees that swapping the final and non-final states works? (Hint: number of computations.)<br /><br />▶SEND ME THEORY QUESTIONS◀<br />[email protected]<br /><br />▶ABOUT ME◀<br />I am a professor of Computer Science, and am passionate about CS theory. I have taught over 12 courses at Arizona State University, as well as Colgate University, including several sections of undergraduate theory.<br /><br />▶ABOUT THIS CHANNEL◀<br />The theory of computation is perhaps the fundamental theory of computer science. It sets out to define, mathematically, what exactly computation is, what is feasible to solve using a computer, and also what is not possible to solve using a computer. The main objective is to define a computer mathematically, without the reliance on real-world computers, hardware or software, or the plethora of programming languages we have in use today. The notion of a Turing machine serves this purpose and defines what we believe is the crux of all computable functions.<br /><br />This channel is also about weaker forms of computation, concentrating on two classes: regular languages and context-free languages. These two models help understand what we can do with restricted means of computation, and offer a rich theory using which you can hone your mathematical skills in reasoning with simple machines and the languages they define. <br /><br />However, they are not simply there as a weak form of computation--the most attractive aspect of them is that problems formulated on them are tractable, i.e. we can build efficient algorithms to reason with objects such as finite automata, context-free grammars and pushdown automata. For example, we can model a piece of hardware (a circuit) as a finite-state system an<br />...<br /><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zq_aakGIIiM" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zq_aakGIIiM</a>