if the unfolding happens then the revenging arthrography happens.
sent1: that the sit-up happens and the IPO occurs brings about that the unfolding occurs. sent2: that both the sit-up and the IPO happens prevents the unfolding. sent3: if the crime does not occur then the emblazoning table and the revenging arthrography occurs. sent4: if the emblazoning table occurs the non-preprandialness and the unfolding occurs. sent5: if the IPO does not occur and the emblazoning table does not occur then the fact that the revenging arthrography happens is not incorrect. sent6: the emblazoning table does not occur. sent7: the sit-up happens. sent8: if that both the sit-up and the IPO occurs is wrong that the daciticness does not occur is not wrong.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the IPO happens.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the sit-up occurs and the IPO happens.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the unfolding does not occur.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the unfolding occurs.; int2 & assump2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the IPO does not occur.; int4 & sent6 -> int5: the IPO does not occur and the emblazoning table does not occur.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: the revenging arthrography happens.; [assump2] & int6 -> hypothesis;
both the non-daciticness and the non-preprandialness happens.
$hypothesis$ = if the unfolding happens then the revenging arthrography happens. ; $context$ = sent1: that the sit-up happens and the IPO occurs brings about that the unfolding occurs. sent2: that both the sit-up and the IPO happens prevents the unfolding. sent3: if the crime does not occur then the emblazoning table and the revenging arthrography occurs. sent4: if the emblazoning table occurs the non-preprandialness and the unfolding occurs. sent5: if the IPO does not occur and the emblazoning table does not occur then the fact that the revenging arthrography happens is not incorrect. sent6: the emblazoning table does not occur. sent7: the sit-up happens. sent8: if that both the sit-up and the IPO occurs is wrong that the daciticness does not occur is not wrong. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the IPO happens.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the sit-up occurs and the IPO happens.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the unfolding does not occur.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the unfolding occurs.; int2 & assump2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the IPO does not occur.; int4 & sent6 -> int5: the IPO does not occur and the emblazoning table does not occur.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: the revenging arthrography happens.; [assump2] & int6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__