the fact that the radiance occurs is correct.
sent1: if the enjoying Arcadic does not occur the enjoying gratification does not occur. sent2: the fact that that both the inconsistentness and the enjoying gratification happens is right leads to the non-uninstructiveness. sent3: if the photovoltaicness does not occur then that the inconsistentness and the radiance happens is not wrong. sent4: the radiance does not occur if the enjoying gratification does not occur and the inconsistentness does not occur. sent5: both the interstitialness and the beating Karloff occurs if the fact that the breakdown does not occur is right. sent6: if the fact that both the uninstructiveness and the enjoying Arcadic happens is not correct the enjoying gratification does not occur. sent7: the photovoltaicness does not occur if the Shakespearianness occurs. sent8: the inconsistentness does not occur. sent9: the breakdown occurs. sent10: if the breakdown does not occur both the radiance and the beating Karloff happens. sent11: that the acupressure occurs is prevented by that both the beating Karloff and the breakdown occurs. sent12: the extensileness happens and the ductlessness happens. sent13: the acupressure occurs. sent14: that the uninstructiveness and the enjoying Arcadic occurs does not hold if that the beating Karloff does not occur is right.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the beating Karloff happens.; assump1 & sent9 -> int1: both the beating Karloff and the breakdown happens.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the acupressure does not occur.; int2 & sent13 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the beating Karloff does not occur.; int4 & sent14 -> int5: the fact that that the uninstructiveness occurs and the enjoying Arcadic happens is not false is not right.; int5 & sent6 -> int6: the enjoying gratification does not occur.; int6 & sent8 -> int7: the enjoying gratification does not occur and the inconsistentness does not occur.; int7 & sent4 -> hypothesis;
the radiance occurs.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the radiance occurs is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the enjoying Arcadic does not occur the enjoying gratification does not occur. sent2: the fact that that both the inconsistentness and the enjoying gratification happens is right leads to the non-uninstructiveness. sent3: if the photovoltaicness does not occur then that the inconsistentness and the radiance happens is not wrong. sent4: the radiance does not occur if the enjoying gratification does not occur and the inconsistentness does not occur. sent5: both the interstitialness and the beating Karloff occurs if the fact that the breakdown does not occur is right. sent6: if the fact that both the uninstructiveness and the enjoying Arcadic happens is not correct the enjoying gratification does not occur. sent7: the photovoltaicness does not occur if the Shakespearianness occurs. sent8: the inconsistentness does not occur. sent9: the breakdown occurs. sent10: if the breakdown does not occur both the radiance and the beating Karloff happens. sent11: that the acupressure occurs is prevented by that both the beating Karloff and the breakdown occurs. sent12: the extensileness happens and the ductlessness happens. sent13: the acupressure occurs. sent14: that the uninstructiveness and the enjoying Arcadic occurs does not hold if that the beating Karloff does not occur is right. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the beating Karloff happens.; assump1 & sent9 -> int1: both the beating Karloff and the breakdown happens.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the acupressure does not occur.; int2 & sent13 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the beating Karloff does not occur.; int4 & sent14 -> int5: the fact that that the uninstructiveness occurs and the enjoying Arcadic happens is not false is not right.; int5 & sent6 -> int6: the enjoying gratification does not occur.; int6 & sent8 -> int7: the enjoying gratification does not occur and the inconsistentness does not occur.; int7 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__