the fall occurs.
sent1: the shinny occurs. sent2: the fact that the abnormalness does not occur is not incorrect. sent3: if the rally does not occur both the epistemicness and the non-diffusingness occurs. sent4: the public happens. sent5: that the advancement does not occur leads to that the publicness happens and the abnormalness happens. sent6: the rally happens and the publicness happens. sent7: if the finishing Roccus occurs then not the advancement but the outflanking pus happens. sent8: that the rallying but not the falling occurs is not right if the abnormalness does not occur.
sent6 -> int1: the rally occurs.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fall does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the rally but not the falling happens.; sent8 & sent2 -> int3: that the rallying but not the fall occurs is wrong.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the epistemicness but not the diffusing occurs hold.
$hypothesis$ = the fall occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the shinny occurs. sent2: the fact that the abnormalness does not occur is not incorrect. sent3: if the rally does not occur both the epistemicness and the non-diffusingness occurs. sent4: the public happens. sent5: that the advancement does not occur leads to that the publicness happens and the abnormalness happens. sent6: the rally happens and the publicness happens. sent7: if the finishing Roccus occurs then not the advancement but the outflanking pus happens. sent8: that the rallying but not the falling occurs is not right if the abnormalness does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
sent6 -> int1: the rally occurs.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fall does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the rally but not the falling happens.; sent8 & sent2 -> int3: that the rallying but not the fall occurs is wrong.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__