Consider the following premises. forall x_19: P_11(x_19) or T(x_19). exists x_19: ~P_11(x_19). forall x_19: Q_6(x_19) -> W(x_19). forall x_19: Q_19(x_19) or Q_6(x_19). forall x_19: W(x_19) <-> Q_19(x_19). Can we infer forall x_19: ~T(x_19) from them? If possible, name the inference rules being used at each step.
 From forall x_19: W(x_19) <-> Q_19(x_19) we can infer forall x_19: Q_19(x_19) -> W(x_19) via universal biconditional elimination. From forall x_19: P_11(x_19) or T(x_19), exists x_19: ~P_11(x_19) we can infer exists x_19: T(x_19) via existential disjunctive syllogism. From forall x_19: Q_19(x_19) -> W(x_19), forall x_19: Q_6(x_19) -> W(x_19), forall x_19: Q_19(x_19) or Q_6(x_19) we can infer forall x_19: W(x_19) via universal disjunction elimination. From forall x_19: W(x_19), exists x_19: T(x_19) we can infer exists x_19: W(x_19) and T(x_19) via existential conjunction. Finally, from exists x_19: W(x_19) and T(x_19) we can infer exists x_19: W(x_19) via existential simplification, which contradicts forall x_19: ~T(x_19). Therefore, the answer is no.