My mathematical model is similar to the code that implements it (in fact the code is just an alternatate denotation of the model). I’ve been playing around with the model for the past few days to no avail. Today I took a big picture view of it and simply looked at the high-level mathematical properties of the system. This allowed me to come up with a better solution to the problem that originally showed the bug in my model.
I had a solution to the mildly context sensitive language ww. This solution didn’t work on the model as there was a bug in said model. I think I fixed the model, but I tried the same solution to ww. Given that the model had changed, it was probably not a good idea to use the same solution. So I’ve come up with a better high level solution. I’m going to see if my “fixed” model (which is still slightly broken) can solve it. Then fix the broken bits in the most simple way and finally check the model for consistency. I don’t want to get bogged down in the actual implementation of the model again.
On another note the first free software foundation Europe – Ireland (fsfe-ie) meeting last night was interesting. Strangely enough 4 of the people there worked in TCS. We’re hopefully going to get a good anti-patent campaign off the ground soon. Imagine if I was able to patent the code that implements my model even though I know the code is just an alternative way of writing the maths, we’d be on our way to allowing the patenting of maths then. Not a good idea 
what has happened with the “Anti-Patent-Campaign”. We are planning these services here also. Please keep informed.
Sincerly
Dr. Manfred Baumgärtner