Proof
Suppose it were possible to construct a graph that fulfils condition (*) which is not Hamiltonian. According to this supposition, let G be a graph on n ≥ 3 vertices that satisfies property (*), is not Hamiltonian, and has the maximum possible number of edges among all n-vertex non-Hamiltonian graphs that satisfy property (*). Because the number of edges was chosen to be maximal, G must contain a Hamiltonian path v1v2...vn, for otherwise it would be possible to add edges to G without breaching property (*). Since G is not Hamiltonian, v1 cannot be adjacent to vn, for otherwise v1v2...vn would be a Hamiltonian cycle. By property (*), deg v1 + deg vn ≥ n, and the pigeon hole principle implies that for some i in the range 2 ≤ i ≤ n − 1, vi is adjacent to v1 and vi − 1 is adjacent to vn. But the cycle v1v2...vi − 1vnvn − 1...vi is then a Hamilton cycle. This contradiction yields the result.
Read more about this topic: Ore's Theorem
Famous quotes containing the word proof:
“Right and proof are two crutches for everything bent and crooked that limps along.”
—Franz Grillparzer (17911872)
“There is no better proof of a mans being truly good than his desiring to be constantly under the observation of good men.”
—François, Duc De La Rochefoucauld (16131680)
“When children feel good about themselves, its like a snowball rolling downhill. They are continually able to recognize and integrate new proof of their value as they grow and mature.”
—Stephanie Martson (20th century)