Description: Part of proof of Lemma G of Crawley p. 116; 2nd line p. 117, which
says that (our) cdlemg10 "implies (2)" (of p. 116). No details are
provided by the authors, so there may be a shorter proof; but ours
requires the 14 lemmas, one using Desargues's law dalaw , in order to
make this inference. This final step eliminates the
( RF ) =/= ( RG ) condition from cdlemg12 . TODO: FIX
COMMENT. TODO: should we also eliminate P =/= Q here (or earlier)?
Do it if we don't need to add it in for something else later.
(Contributed by NM, 6-May-2013)