Euler Circuits and Vertices of Even Degree: Proof and Counter-Proof

  • Thread starter Thread starter MathNerd
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Circuits Euler
Click For Summary
A connected graph containing an Euler circuit necessitates that all vertices have even degrees, but the converse is also true: if a connected graph has only vertices of even degree, it contains an Euler circuit. The discussion explores a proof using induction, starting with simple cases and building complexity. By demonstrating that removing loops from traversed paths maintains the even degree condition, the argument suggests that all connected components will also possess Euler circuits. Overall, the reasoning supports the conclusion that the existence of even-degree vertices in a connected graph guarantees an Euler circuit.
MathNerd
If a connected graph has a Euler circuit then this implies that all the vertices of the graph have even degree. Is the converse of this argument true? i.e. If a connected graph only contains vertices of even degree does this imply it contains an Euler Circuit?

Could somebody please show me a proof (or counter-proof) of the above statement or at least direct me to a website that contains such a proof?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
well i believe it is well known that this is true so let's just prove it. maybe induction would work. so start with a graph with one edge, then it has to be a loop at one vertex hence it is true. oir do you allow loops?

if not then we have at least two edges and two vertices and it again appears true. Ok now let's see,... how do we make the inductive step? well heck it seems obvious how to prove it... just start walking around the graph, beginning from anywhere. If we ever arrive twice at the same vertex say A, then there is a loop formed by the paths traversed between our first and second arrivals at A. Since no other path has ever been visited twice, this loop is a chain of paths formed by entering and leaving certain vertices.

now erase all those poaths in that loop. That diminishes each vertex visited by exactly two edges. so we are left again with an even graph, possibly not connected. still by induction on the number of edges, every connected component of it has an euler circuit presumably beginning anywhere. so we seem to be able to cobble these together to get an euler circuit of the whole thing. well pretty ugly so far, but it seems perhaps true.

this is probab;ly proved in essentially any book on elementary math, or just type in "bridges of konigsberg" to google.
 
gee, the coverage on the websites i found was so shallow that none proved the converse. but i think my argument essentially proves it. i.e. removing the partial circuit described, leaves a finite number of connected graphs, all even, so just go around your partial circuit and take side trips around any connected component of the complement as you come tot hem.

'note that you may assume by induction that a circuit of an even graph may start and end anywhere. or just observe that this is obvious if there exists a circuit at all.
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
5K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K