The new PROOF file appears to be a copied terminal hexdump (offsets/hex columns) containing the string "malicious\nthis sentence is false." and is not referenced elsewhere in the repo. If this is intended documentation, please add a short plain-text explanation (and place it in an appropriate docs/proofs location); otherwise remove this file to avoid committing accidental/suspicious artifacts.

I was showing that x: y: z: or whatever actually has inline hierarchical meaning for some reason when it comes to EOF, and I was also pointing out that many long ongoing strings, such as those related to 0, typically end in a trivial hex reference. @copilot

This hexdump includes a non-ASCII leading glyph and extensive trailing whitespace, which can create noisy diffs and potential encoding issues. Please normalize the file content (UTF-8 plain text) and strip trailing spaces/newline-only padding if the file is meant to be checked in.

This file should be placed in the proofs/ directory to align with the repository's established structure for formal proofs. All other proof files are located in proofs/ (e.g., proofs/self-reference.md, proofs/ternary-efficiency.md), and the file should follow the naming convention of those files (e.g., proofs/hex-encoding.md).

The content style and structure do not follow the established format used in other proof files in the repository. Existing proofs (see proofs/self-reference.md, proofs/ternary-efficiency.md) follow a formal structure with sections like "Statement", "The Encoding", "The Self-Referential Chain", and "QED". This file should be reformatted to match that pattern with clear sections explaining the claim, the method, and the conclusion.

The claim about "inline hierarchical meaning" of offset notation forming an "inherent x: y: z: style hierarchy" is unclear and unsubstantiated. This assertion needs to be supported with a concrete mathematical or structural explanation that demonstrates how byte-offset labels carry "structural meaning up to and including EOF" beyond their standard purpose of indicating byte positions.

The claim that "long ongoing strings — especially those related to 0 — typically terminate with a trivial single-byte hex value" is unsubstantiated and misleading. Strings ending with a period (0x2e) is simply because the example string ends with that character, not because of any inherent pattern related to "strings related to 0" or a general rule about hex-encoded strings. This statement conflates the specific content of this example with a general principle.

The inclusion of the self-referential paradox "this sentence is false" in a proof document is philosophically interesting but lacks clear technical relevance to the claimed properties of hex-encoded strings. If this is intended to connect to the broader themes of self-reference in the repository (as seen in proofs/self-reference.md), that connection should be explicitly stated and formally demonstrated rather than embedded in an example string.

Line 1 describes this as a property of “hex-encoded strings”, but the content below is a hex dump/representation of raw bytes (ASCII + newline), not a string encoded as hex text. Consider rewording to avoid confusion about whether the payload is hex-encoded text vs bytes being displayed in hex.

The PR title includes “malicious sentence”, but the file content frames this as a documentation/proof artifact. Consider renaming the file and/or adjusting the title/content to clearly communicate intent and avoid implying the repository is adding malicious material.

The PROOF file contains a hexdump of the content from REAL.md, but this relationship is not documented. Consider adding a comment explaining that this hexdump demonstrates the encoding of the content found in REAL.md, or alternatively, reference REAL.md explicitly in the description to help readers understand the connection between these files.