[continued from previous message]   
      
   Then why do it assume it? If it doesn't know that it is itself, how does   
   it know it will "simulate" the input?   
      
   And that would be a wrong definition of the HHH that it calls, as it   
   actually simulates that input till it detects what it thinks is a   
   non-halting pattern and then returns 0.   
      
   Why did you lie to HHH about what was in the memory?   
      
   Only because if you told the truth to HHH, it would show that you   
   statement about HHH being correct was a lie.   
      
   > HHH just sees that DDD is calling the same function   
   > with the same parameter twice in sequence, just like   
   > Infinite_Recursion().   
      
   But the problem is HHH thinks that HHH isn't part of HHH, which would be   
   like saying the recursed call to Infinite_Reursion isn't part of that   
   program.   
      
   Since the HHH that DDD calls is part of it, HHH needs to simulate AND   
   SHOW that. And since that HHH has conditionals in it, you can't just   
   assume the loop is infinite.   
      
   Thus, your pattern is just not correct, because you lied to yourself   
   about what you were doing.   
      
   >   
   >> Further irrelevant claims without evidence ignored.   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>> Perhaps you have an ACM email address and don't   
   >>> know very much about programming?   
   >   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)