the lash does not occur.
sent1: the fact that the sartorialness occurs and/or the trivalentness does not occur is not correct if the noninheritableness does not occur. sent2: that both the unobviousness and the synopticness occurs results in that the lashing occurs. sent3: either the miffing or the novation or both occurs. sent4: the miffing does not occur and/or the novation happens if the resonance does not occur. sent5: the potentness occurs if that the sartorialness and/or the non-trivalentness occurs is not correct. sent6: the baby does not occur. sent7: if the fact that the replicating duplex does not occur but the noninheritableness happens is not right the noninheritableness does not occur. sent8: the resonance causes the fact that that the novation happens and the miffing does not occur hold. sent9: if the synopticness and the unobviousness happens then the metabolizing woodwork does not occur. sent10: that the miffing occurs causes that the obviousness does not occur. sent11: the resonance does not occur if that the potentness happens and the replicating whipping occurs is not false. sent12: if the miffing does not occur and/or the novation occurs then the miffing does not occur. sent13: if the shearing does not occur that not the replicating duplex but the noninheritableness occurs is wrong. sent14: that the shearing but not the replicating Burt happens does not hold if the dawn happens. sent15: the unobviousness is triggered by either the miffing or the novation or both. sent16: the shears does not occur if that the shears happens and the replicating Burt does not occur does not hold. sent17: if the synopticness happens then the obviousness happens. sent18: the lash occurs if the miffing happens. sent19: the lashing does not occur if the synopticness does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the synopticness occurs.; sent17 & assump1 -> int1: the obviousness happens.; sent15 & sent3 -> int2: the obviousness does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the synopticness does not occur is true.; int4 & sent19 -> hypothesis;
the lash happens.
$hypothesis$ = the lash does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the sartorialness occurs and/or the trivalentness does not occur is not correct if the noninheritableness does not occur. sent2: that both the unobviousness and the synopticness occurs results in that the lashing occurs. sent3: either the miffing or the novation or both occurs. sent4: the miffing does not occur and/or the novation happens if the resonance does not occur. sent5: the potentness occurs if that the sartorialness and/or the non-trivalentness occurs is not correct. sent6: the baby does not occur. sent7: if the fact that the replicating duplex does not occur but the noninheritableness happens is not right the noninheritableness does not occur. sent8: the resonance causes the fact that that the novation happens and the miffing does not occur hold. sent9: if the synopticness and the unobviousness happens then the metabolizing woodwork does not occur. sent10: that the miffing occurs causes that the obviousness does not occur. sent11: the resonance does not occur if that the potentness happens and the replicating whipping occurs is not false. sent12: if the miffing does not occur and/or the novation occurs then the miffing does not occur. sent13: if the shearing does not occur that not the replicating duplex but the noninheritableness occurs is wrong. sent14: that the shearing but not the replicating Burt happens does not hold if the dawn happens. sent15: the unobviousness is triggered by either the miffing or the novation or both. sent16: the shears does not occur if that the shears happens and the replicating Burt does not occur does not hold. sent17: if the synopticness happens then the obviousness happens. sent18: the lash occurs if the miffing happens. sent19: the lashing does not occur if the synopticness does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the synopticness occurs.; sent17 & assump1 -> int1: the obviousness happens.; sent15 & sent3 -> int2: the obviousness does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the synopticness does not occur is true.; int4 & sent19 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__