The phrase "a possible proof" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing a potential argument or evidence that may support a claim or theory.
Example: "In this paper, I will present a possible proof for the conjecture that has puzzled mathematicians for decades."
Alternatives: "a potential proof" or "an alternative proof".
We talk about three potential sources of revenue for Dreve, including a possible proof of concept test that could lead to short-term revenue generation.
A possible proof for P v NP was leaked on the internet in August this year – I remember receiving a text at about midnight with the rumour someone had proven that P does not equal NP.
Three years ago a possible proof was posted on the internet by Grigori Perelman, a Russian who lives with his mother in a Saint Petersburg flat and is as reclusive as Poincaré was fêted.
Therefore, a possible proof must go along different lines.
Game Informer called it "absurd", stating that while it was a possible proof of concept film it was more likely completely fake, and adding "It looks goofy as hell, and Pokéfans are sure to get a couple chuckles out of it if nothing else".
For example, here's a possible proof that: The square root of a number (that means any number) tends to infinity as that number tends to infinity.
The negation $\neg A$ of a formula $A$ is proven once it has been shown that there cannot exist a proof of $A$, which means providing a construction that derives falsum from any possible proof of $A$.
Note the subtle difference between "$A$ is not intuitionistically true " and "$A$ is intuitionistically refutable": in the first case we know that $A$ cannot have an intuitionistic proof, the second statement expresses that we have a proof of ¬A, i.e. a construction that derives falsum from any possible proof of $A$.
Therefore, an other possible proof for the data improvement is the fact that the number of observations with an residual less than 30 nT to the CM4 model could be increased.
Mr. McGreevey's lawyer, William E. Lawler 3rd, said that "the fact that they aren't filing a suit is the clearest possible proof that they don't have, and didn't ever have, a real claim against the governor".
Ukraine has already provided all the possible proof as well as an ironclad alibi".
