that if the fact that the warp occurs hold the regulation occurs does not hold.
sent1: the overreaching sizzling happens if the fact that the warp and the non-catalyticness occurs does not hold. sent2: if the catalyticness does not occur the impelling frangipane happens. sent3: the impelling frangipane occurs if that not the warp but the catalyticness happens is not correct. sent4: the catalyticness occurs. sent5: if the impelling frangipane happens then the regulation happens.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the warp occurs.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the warp does not occur and the catalyticness occurs.; assump2 -> int1: the warp does not occur.; assump1 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: the fact that not the warp but the catalyticness happens does not hold.; sent3 & int3 -> int4: the impelling frangipane happens.; sent5 & int4 -> int5: the regulation occurs.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis;
the overreaching sizzling happens.
$hypothesis$ = that if the fact that the warp occurs hold the regulation occurs does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the overreaching sizzling happens if the fact that the warp and the non-catalyticness occurs does not hold. sent2: if the catalyticness does not occur the impelling frangipane happens. sent3: the impelling frangipane occurs if that not the warp but the catalyticness happens is not correct. sent4: the catalyticness occurs. sent5: if the impelling frangipane happens then the regulation happens. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the warp occurs.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the warp does not occur and the catalyticness occurs.; assump2 -> int1: the warp does not occur.; assump1 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: the fact that not the warp but the catalyticness happens does not hold.; sent3 & int3 -> int4: the impelling frangipane happens.; sent5 & int4 -> int5: the regulation occurs.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__