New principle

In my Probability and Epistemology seminar, we're reading part of Tim Williamson's Knowledge and Its Limits. In the book, he defends the principle

E=K, that is, for a subject S, S's evidence is equal to S's knowledge.

I want to defend a slightly more controversial principle:

'E' = 'K', that is, the letter E is the same as the letter K.

This principle would seem to have the undesirable consequence that the alphabet has only 25 letters. But, by making some plausible assumptions, I think I can avoid that consequence.

Plausible Assumption 1: There are more letters in the alphabet than those given in the alphabet song, taught in kindergarten, and used in words of English.

Plausible Assumption 2: In fact, there is just one letter not given in the alphabet song, taught in kindergarten, or used in words of English. I don't have a symbol for it on my keyboard (not surprisingly, since it's not used in any words, and Dell wants to cut costs wherever possible). But, we'll call it 'schmee'.

Given these two assumptions, my principle 'E' = 'K' need not lead to the consequence that there are only 25 letters in the alphabet. In fact, given schmee, there are still 26. So much for that objection.