As the title says, I am not sure how the former implies the latter. Please someone sketch a few details.
Many thanks
As the title says, I am not sure how the former implies the latter. Please someone sketch a few details.
Many thanks
NPC is the set of all NP problems which would let you solve any other NP problem in polynomial time. If P = NP, then you can already solve any NP problem in polynomial time, so all NP problems are NP-complete.
By definition $\text{NPC}\subseteq \text{NP}$.
To show the other inclusion, $\text{NP}\subseteq \text{NPC}$, formally we need to find a way to transform any instance of a problem $A\in\text{NP}$ to an instance of any other problem $B\in\text{NP}$ in polynomial time, and transform the solution of the instance of $B$ to a solution of $A$.
But the whole point of that is that the composition of the transformation of the problem, the solution to the $\text{B}$-instance and the transformation of the solution is a polynomial algorithm for solving the original problem. As the original problem can already be solved in polynomial time (as it is in $\text{P}$) we don't really need all that.
If you want to be more formal:
This is an example of where being very formalistic, makes life quite hard.