Consider the following premises. For all x_16, x_16 is poor or x_16 is a doctor. For all x_16, x_16 is a scientist or x_16 is a carpenter. For all x_16, x_16 will sleep and x_16 is happy. For all x_16, if x_16 were a scientist, then x_16 is not a cashier. For all x_16, if x_16 were poor, then x_16 is a cashier. For all x_16, if x_16 were a doctor, then x_16 is a cashier. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one x_16 for which either x_16 will sleep or x_16 is a carpenter are not true.
 From the fact that for all x_16, if x_16 were poor, then x_16 is a cashier, that for all x_16, if x_16 were a doctor, then x_16 is a cashier, and that for all x_16, x_16 is poor or x_16 is a doctor we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 is a cashier. From the fact that for all x_16, if x_16 were a scientist, then x_16 is not a cashier, and that for all x_16, x_16 is a cashier we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 is not a scientist. From the fact that for all x_16, x_16 will sleep and x_16 is happy we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 will sleep. From the fact that for all x_16, x_16 is a scientist or x_16 is a carpenter, and that for all x_16, x_16 is not a scientist we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 is a carpenter. Finally, from the fact that for all x_16, x_16 will sleep, and that for all x_16, x_16 is a carpenter we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 will sleep and x_16 is a carpenter, which contradicts that There is at least one x_16 for which either x_16 will sleep or x_16 is a carpenter are not true. Therefore, the answer is no.