DDD correctly emulated by HHH is correctly rejected as non-halting.

typedef void (*ptr)();
int HHH(ptr P);
void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
}
int main()
{
   HHH(DDD);
}
We stipulate that the only measure of a correct emulation
is the semantics of the x86 programming language. By this
measure when 1 to ∞ steps of DDD are correctly emulated by
each pure function x86 emulator HHH (of the infinite set
of every HHH that can possibly exist) then DDD cannot
possibly reach past its own machine address of 0000216b
and halt.
_DDD()
[00002163] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002164] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002166] 6863210000 push 00002163 ; push DDD
[0000216b] e853f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DDD)
[00002170] 83c404     add esp,+04
[00002173] 5d         pop ebp
[00002174] c3         ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002174]
*This algorithm is used by the simulating termination analyzers*
<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
     If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D
     until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never
     stop running unless aborted then
     H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
     specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
</MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
Simulating termination analyzer HHH aborts its emulation of DDD
as soon as it correctly detects any non-halting behavior pattern.
At this point it aborts its emulation and returns 0 indicating
that it rejected this input as non-halting.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer