the septation does not occur.
sent1: not the losslessness but the irrational occurs if the technical occurs. sent2: not the summarizing abort but the irrationalness occurs if that the technical does not occur is not wrong. sent3: the irrationalness happens. sent4: if the summarizing invaluableness does not occur the aikido occurs. sent5: the fact that the summarizing abort does not occur hold. sent6: that the disloyalness does not occur results in that the septation and the substantivalness happens. sent7: if the technical occurs then the irrationalness occurs. sent8: either the losslessness happens or the illusion does not occur or both if the frisk does not occur. sent9: the septation does not occur if the fact that the mitoticness and/or the summarizing abort happens does not hold. sent10: the fact that the summarizing invaluableness or the aikido or both occurs is not right if the dropkicking does not occur. sent11: the fact that the Flemishness does not occur is not wrong. sent12: the bombing does not occur. sent13: that the aikido happens is correct. sent14: that if the substantivalness occurs and the disloyalness happens the illusion does not occur hold. sent15: the disloyalness occurs. sent16: the immunochemicalness happens and the solidness happens. sent17: if the fact that the summarizing invaluableness or the aikido or both occurs is not right that the technicalness does not occur is correct. sent18: the technical occurs. sent19: the summarizing abort does not occur if the substantivalness does not occur. sent20: the aikido and the frisking occurs if the summarizing invaluableness does not occur. sent21: that that the mitoticness happens and/or the summarizing abort occurs is right is incorrect if the substantivalness does not occur. sent22: the summarizing invaluableness does not occur. sent23: the fact that both the frisking and the non-losslessness happens is false if the illusion does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the substantivalness happens.; assump1 & sent15 -> int1: the substantivalness and the disloyalness occurs.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the fact that the illusion does not occur is not wrong.; int2 & sent23 -> int3: the fact that both the frisk and the non-losslessness happens does not hold.; sent20 & sent22 -> int4: the aikido and the frisk happens.; int4 -> int5: the frisk happens.; sent1 & sent18 -> int6: not the losslessness but the irrational occurs.; int6 -> int7: the losslessness does not occur.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the frisking and the non-losslessness happens.; int3 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: the substantivalness does not occur.; int10 & sent21 -> int11: that either the mitoticness occurs or the summarizing abort occurs or both is not correct.; int11 & sent9 -> hypothesis;
the septation occurs.
$hypothesis$ = the septation does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: not the losslessness but the irrational occurs if the technical occurs. sent2: not the summarizing abort but the irrationalness occurs if that the technical does not occur is not wrong. sent3: the irrationalness happens. sent4: if the summarizing invaluableness does not occur the aikido occurs. sent5: the fact that the summarizing abort does not occur hold. sent6: that the disloyalness does not occur results in that the septation and the substantivalness happens. sent7: if the technical occurs then the irrationalness occurs. sent8: either the losslessness happens or the illusion does not occur or both if the frisk does not occur. sent9: the septation does not occur if the fact that the mitoticness and/or the summarizing abort happens does not hold. sent10: the fact that the summarizing invaluableness or the aikido or both occurs is not right if the dropkicking does not occur. sent11: the fact that the Flemishness does not occur is not wrong. sent12: the bombing does not occur. sent13: that the aikido happens is correct. sent14: that if the substantivalness occurs and the disloyalness happens the illusion does not occur hold. sent15: the disloyalness occurs. sent16: the immunochemicalness happens and the solidness happens. sent17: if the fact that the summarizing invaluableness or the aikido or both occurs is not right that the technicalness does not occur is correct. sent18: the technical occurs. sent19: the summarizing abort does not occur if the substantivalness does not occur. sent20: the aikido and the frisking occurs if the summarizing invaluableness does not occur. sent21: that that the mitoticness happens and/or the summarizing abort occurs is right is incorrect if the substantivalness does not occur. sent22: the summarizing invaluableness does not occur. sent23: the fact that both the frisking and the non-losslessness happens is false if the illusion does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the substantivalness happens.; assump1 & sent15 -> int1: the substantivalness and the disloyalness occurs.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the fact that the illusion does not occur is not wrong.; int2 & sent23 -> int3: the fact that both the frisk and the non-losslessness happens does not hold.; sent20 & sent22 -> int4: the aikido and the frisk happens.; int4 -> int5: the frisk happens.; sent1 & sent18 -> int6: not the losslessness but the irrational occurs.; int6 -> int7: the losslessness does not occur.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the frisking and the non-losslessness happens.; int3 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: the substantivalness does not occur.; int10 & sent21 -> int11: that either the mitoticness occurs or the summarizing abort occurs or both is not correct.; int11 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__