Standart Flip-flop

Pretty cool.

Like your work

Sorry, I disagree. The layout is confusing, and with so many examples of how to give this topology an efficient layout, it's just, well yeah confusing. Also, there are no current limiting resistors in place for the LEDs. It might have been too fast for you guys to notice the 100mA spike that's occurring- slew the clock to 100ms/S and see the LEDs ate getting the "X" of death..

This is just a multivibrator.. As this is your first circuit, you can go to the Examples section and look up Astable Multivibrator an Led Current Limiting towards the bottom for more information

@syukran- sorry I didn't look to see that you are brand new here, and this was your first post- otherwise I might have tried to help instead of just pointing out what I see wrong. You still need some series resistors for those LEDs but I will say this- the layout isn't so bad as i said was, not for you're first one. I see you figured out how to move around and reposition the components, that's good- now try to simplify it a bit by eliminating crossing lines. Ok, good luck!..

@wyoelk- there was a debate a while back between a few users over what can be called a flip-flop, and what can't. I felt both sides were leaning too heavily on semantics, and chose to sit that one out. But in his unending pursuit to bring everything to it's most simplified form, Secuture recited the definition of a flip-flop as "anything with the ability to alternate states". So by that definition it wouldn't be wrong to call an astable (or mono-, or bi-stable) multivibrator a flip-flop. No, it's not the proper name but it isn't incorrect..

@sine_eyed You are right, potatoe, tater, where I grew up we drank "pop" and ina Arizona, they call it "soda". All semantics, I'll be more open, thanks

Truth is elusive. Perhaps because everything evolves. What we think we know to be the truth at a given moment, is merely the sum of the facts as we understand them at this point in time. There will always be more to learn, more to be discovered- and we will always keep looking, for the truth..

@sine_eyed You should run for office.....lol. but that statement is a fact

Indeed. The world certainly isn't flat, yet we were certain of that just a few hundred years ago. In fact, the validity of this "truth" was so absolute in the minds of those with an education, and with authority that anyone who would dare to even suggest otherwise, was most likely to meet his end by swift evisceration, brutish decapitation or perhaps prolonged immolation. None of which are very pleasant. So, how can we be sure of it even if we stumble across it or it gets dropped directly into our laps? Will we have the mental maturity to recognize it for what it is or will it get haphazardly tossed aside as would be some incoherent scribblings on coffee stained napkin? Hmph,the "truth"- who's to say if we'll ever know it's meaning... or if such a thing exists at all...