Prove that the deletion of edges of a minimum-edge cut of a connected graph G results in a disconnected graph with exactly two components.

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
1
down vote

favorite













Prove that the deletion of edges of a minimum-edge cut of a connected
graph $G$ results in a disconnected graph with exactly two components.
(Note that a similar result is not true for a minimum vertex cut.)




Suppose that the deletion of edges of a minimum-edge cut of a
connected graph $G$ results in a disconnected graph with more than two components. Let $G_1, G_2, G_3,...G_k$ be the connected components obtained by removing minimum-edge cut of a connected graph. so, there exists $k$ edges required to make the graph connected. which contadict our assumption. Am I correct?










share|cite|improve this question



























    up vote
    1
    down vote

    favorite













    Prove that the deletion of edges of a minimum-edge cut of a connected
    graph $G$ results in a disconnected graph with exactly two components.
    (Note that a similar result is not true for a minimum vertex cut.)




    Suppose that the deletion of edges of a minimum-edge cut of a
    connected graph $G$ results in a disconnected graph with more than two components. Let $G_1, G_2, G_3,...G_k$ be the connected components obtained by removing minimum-edge cut of a connected graph. so, there exists $k$ edges required to make the graph connected. which contadict our assumption. Am I correct?










    share|cite|improve this question

























      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite












      Prove that the deletion of edges of a minimum-edge cut of a connected
      graph $G$ results in a disconnected graph with exactly two components.
      (Note that a similar result is not true for a minimum vertex cut.)




      Suppose that the deletion of edges of a minimum-edge cut of a
      connected graph $G$ results in a disconnected graph with more than two components. Let $G_1, G_2, G_3,...G_k$ be the connected components obtained by removing minimum-edge cut of a connected graph. so, there exists $k$ edges required to make the graph connected. which contadict our assumption. Am I correct?










      share|cite|improve this question
















      Prove that the deletion of edges of a minimum-edge cut of a connected
      graph $G$ results in a disconnected graph with exactly two components.
      (Note that a similar result is not true for a minimum vertex cut.)




      Suppose that the deletion of edges of a minimum-edge cut of a
      connected graph $G$ results in a disconnected graph with more than two components. Let $G_1, G_2, G_3,...G_k$ be the connected components obtained by removing minimum-edge cut of a connected graph. so, there exists $k$ edges required to make the graph connected. which contadict our assumption. Am I correct?







      proof-verification graph-theory






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Sep 10 at 9:06

























      asked Sep 10 at 8:25









      Math geek

      1346




      1346




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          0
          down vote













          I think there is an important thing to add.



          There exist $k-1$ (not $k$) edges from the original graph required to make it connected (if we take edges from the outside of original graph, the set being smaller doesn't make any contradiction), but each edge can have its endings in at most two of the connected components, and that's why adding one edge can change disconnectivity of at most two connected component only. So after adding one of these $k-1$ edges the disconnectivity of the graph cannot break, because we assumed that we have more than two connected components. Thus we obtained smaller (with quantity $k-2$) minimum-edge cut.



          You can also go with graph with a vertex set $(G_1, G_2, dots , G_k)$ with empty edge set and a set of earlier deleted edges $A=(e_1,e_2,dots,e_k-1)$. For any connected graph it is true that $|E(G)|-1geq |V(G)|$. Therefore for any set of edges smaller than $A$, the graph is disconnected.






          share|cite|improve this answer




















            Your Answer




            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            );
            );
            , "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: false,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2911668%2fprove-that-the-deletion-of-edges-of-a-minimum-edge-cut-of-a-connected-graph-g-re%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest






























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            0
            down vote













            I think there is an important thing to add.



            There exist $k-1$ (not $k$) edges from the original graph required to make it connected (if we take edges from the outside of original graph, the set being smaller doesn't make any contradiction), but each edge can have its endings in at most two of the connected components, and that's why adding one edge can change disconnectivity of at most two connected component only. So after adding one of these $k-1$ edges the disconnectivity of the graph cannot break, because we assumed that we have more than two connected components. Thus we obtained smaller (with quantity $k-2$) minimum-edge cut.



            You can also go with graph with a vertex set $(G_1, G_2, dots , G_k)$ with empty edge set and a set of earlier deleted edges $A=(e_1,e_2,dots,e_k-1)$. For any connected graph it is true that $|E(G)|-1geq |V(G)|$. Therefore for any set of edges smaller than $A$, the graph is disconnected.






            share|cite|improve this answer
























              up vote
              0
              down vote













              I think there is an important thing to add.



              There exist $k-1$ (not $k$) edges from the original graph required to make it connected (if we take edges from the outside of original graph, the set being smaller doesn't make any contradiction), but each edge can have its endings in at most two of the connected components, and that's why adding one edge can change disconnectivity of at most two connected component only. So after adding one of these $k-1$ edges the disconnectivity of the graph cannot break, because we assumed that we have more than two connected components. Thus we obtained smaller (with quantity $k-2$) minimum-edge cut.



              You can also go with graph with a vertex set $(G_1, G_2, dots , G_k)$ with empty edge set and a set of earlier deleted edges $A=(e_1,e_2,dots,e_k-1)$. For any connected graph it is true that $|E(G)|-1geq |V(G)|$. Therefore for any set of edges smaller than $A$, the graph is disconnected.






              share|cite|improve this answer






















                up vote
                0
                down vote










                up vote
                0
                down vote









                I think there is an important thing to add.



                There exist $k-1$ (not $k$) edges from the original graph required to make it connected (if we take edges from the outside of original graph, the set being smaller doesn't make any contradiction), but each edge can have its endings in at most two of the connected components, and that's why adding one edge can change disconnectivity of at most two connected component only. So after adding one of these $k-1$ edges the disconnectivity of the graph cannot break, because we assumed that we have more than two connected components. Thus we obtained smaller (with quantity $k-2$) minimum-edge cut.



                You can also go with graph with a vertex set $(G_1, G_2, dots , G_k)$ with empty edge set and a set of earlier deleted edges $A=(e_1,e_2,dots,e_k-1)$. For any connected graph it is true that $|E(G)|-1geq |V(G)|$. Therefore for any set of edges smaller than $A$, the graph is disconnected.






                share|cite|improve this answer












                I think there is an important thing to add.



                There exist $k-1$ (not $k$) edges from the original graph required to make it connected (if we take edges from the outside of original graph, the set being smaller doesn't make any contradiction), but each edge can have its endings in at most two of the connected components, and that's why adding one edge can change disconnectivity of at most two connected component only. So after adding one of these $k-1$ edges the disconnectivity of the graph cannot break, because we assumed that we have more than two connected components. Thus we obtained smaller (with quantity $k-2$) minimum-edge cut.



                You can also go with graph with a vertex set $(G_1, G_2, dots , G_k)$ with empty edge set and a set of earlier deleted edges $A=(e_1,e_2,dots,e_k-1)$. For any connected graph it is true that $|E(G)|-1geq |V(G)|$. Therefore for any set of edges smaller than $A$, the graph is disconnected.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Sep 11 at 6:21









                Gaha

                657




                657



























                     

                    draft saved


                    draft discarded















































                     


                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2911668%2fprove-that-the-deletion-of-edges-of-a-minimum-edge-cut-of-a-connected-graph-g-re%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest













































































                    這個網誌中的熱門文章

                    Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?

                    Is there any way to eliminate the singular point to solve this integral by hand or by approximations?

                    Strongly p-embedded subgroups and p-Sylow subgroups.