The Voynich Ninja

Two factor verification is a recent security innovation.

Two factor verification is used in the VMs in the examples of several illustrations constructed of combined images: the VMs cosmos and the VMs critter (f80v). The combined images are a fusion of two separate sources. The VMs cosmos is a combination of Oresme and Shirakatsi. The critter is a combination of the Golden Fleece and the 1313 Agnus Dei with a thick covering of the Callisto myth to get the reader to see it function in the opposite direction.

The key to two factor verification is to have two independent factors with a maximized amount of separation. In a medieval situation, that would be to make it unlikely that both elements in the combined illustration would be known by the same person, unless that person possessed the same familiarity with these traditional and cultural elements as the person who created these representations. The simple fact is that both parts are essential in order to fully understand the combination. The VMs cosmos is the prime example.

The VMs cosmos is a combination of cosmos from BNF Fr. 565 fol. 23 (aka Oresme) and the Shirakatsi diagram of the Eight Phases of the Moon. The Oresme cosmos provides the structure for the central part of the VMs cosmos and Shirakatsi provides the eight curved spokes and outer wheel. While the structural comparison of the VMs and Oresme illustrations shows a strong similarity, visual comparison reveals obvious differences.

Structural similarities include use of the uncommon, three-part construction consisting of a central, inverted T-O Earth, stars scattered around the earth, and a cosmic boundary composed of a cloud-based pattern containing 43 undulations.

The distinction that shows that the VMs is not a copy of Oresme is immediately apparent in the representation of Earth. The Oresme illustration is a pictorial representation. The VMs marks the three sections by the (apparent) use of written language. The structure is still the same - and at the same time, there is no chance that visual similarity exists. This is the change from one method of communication to another. This is called a code shift. This change is intentional. Anyone copying a pictorial image is going to reproduce a pictorial image.

Methods of altering visual appearance without changing structure are used in the midsection of stars. Asterisk stars surround the Earth in the Oresme illustration. Polygonal stars encircle the Earth in the VMs. It contrasts the play on word / alternate appearance situation is synonymous Latin words. Meanwhile the apparent visual difference in the appearance of the VMs cosmic boundary is deconflicted through etymology and heraldic tradition, not to mention the 43 undulations.

Likewise the Shirakatsi portion has been visually altered. The curved spokes of the VMs are drawn so they go in the opposite direction. If the 'wheel and curved spokes' were an actual object, then these apparent differences are not different object, but merely different side if the same wheel. Visual alterations, apparently disqualifying differences of appearance can be resolved by seeing things from the other side. While in Shirakatsi, the bands making up the "wheel and spokes' are blank, in the VMs they are filled with written text. Yet another distinctive visual and inconsequential structural difference. The VMs structures are now equivalent to text banners used to provide information in some medieval illustrations where they function like conversation balloons in comic strips, and they are seem as ephemeral.

Not only is two factor verification needed to fully understand these combined VMs illustrations, it is also clear that an uncommon, matching structure makes a strong connection, while visual alterations have been used to maximize the differences of appearance. IMO, the use of visual alteration is intentional obfuscation which serves to disguise the reality of hidden information derived from history and tradition. This clearly implies that the VMs consists of a visual level of disguised appearance (at least in some parts) and a hidden level of structural and traditional reality, which the recovery of relevant tradition has started to reveal.

Two factor identification means to identify someone using 2 different factors, usually two different machines. Ie a password on your pc and a passcode on your phone. 
Your theory, if it had a name, would be something like double factor identification. Although I confess I have no idea how it would work in practice.

(06-08-2020, 09:42 PM)davidjackson Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Two factor identification means to identify someone using 2 different factors, usually two different machines. Ie a password on your pc and a passcode on your phone. 
Your theory, if it had a name, would be something like double factor identification. Although I confess I have no idea how it would work in practice.

Someone's been watching the latest Tom Scott clip

Well, a factor is a factor, right? And there are two of them. Two is the doubling of one. And verification is identification. Knowing what's what. As opposed to not knowing what's what, and not knowing what you're not knowing.

Tradition exists in the VMs, but it is somewhat disguised by ambiguity, rather than being a straight-forward representation to other potential readers as contemporaries of that time and subsequently, from the VMs author's perspective. For more than a century of modern VMs investigation, traditional interpretations of VMs illustrations, such as the comparison of the VMs Creature (f79v) with a similar illustration in Harley 334 f. 57, and others were simply outside the realm of the then-current capability. That is no longer true. Melusine was a viable, mythical tradition among several, ruling families in Europe, for example, a medieval reality that quietly slipped away.

So, this is not the modern digitized system that verifies electronic codes. This is an old-fashioned process dependent on traditional information contained in visual images, and drawings in the VMs. It uses elements from disparate sources and forges them together in a combination which requires both elements to be recognized for a fuller understanding.

Suppose I have an old black-and-white photo of a blonde actress with black, bushy eyebrows, big black glasses, and a fat, black mustache. Who is it?  Not a clue. If I were her, I'd get lasik and shave. This is the VMs cosmos. This is Newbold's folly. This is the VMs representation of Andromeda by Roger Bacon. This is not having a a clue as to what is being seen.

Now suppose some someone else sees that photo and says, 'I believe that the lady is Marilyn Monroe. I don't remember her as having that much facial hair. Maybe she was hiding the hair, or the hair was hiding her.'  This is 2014 when E. Velinska  compares the VMs cosmos with the Oresme and de Metz versions of the cosmos.

I take the photo to another person, who laughs and explains that all the black 'artwork' is a secondary addition. This is the representative iconography of Groucho Marx. It could be drawn on anyone. According to this source, it could be Jayne Mansfield, Phyllis Diller or who knows. This is the 2014 discovery of David Scheers to identify the Shirakatsi diagram of the Eight Phases of the Moon.

In either case, once the recovery of both traditional elements (or the double factor identification) occurs, the combined representation can be fully explained. That's how it works. Both items stand alone, independently, and when brought together they will mesh properly. Different systems but similar requirements in both situations.

It is perhaps of interest to note that different applications use different words for largely the same thing: identification, verification, authentication.

None of these apply to the Voynich example in the opening post, I am afraid, because both would have to be independent, apply to the same item, and have a very small probability of giving a 'false positive' (i.e. you think they are the same but they are not).
The "two factor" comes in because the probability of two false positives is the product of each individual false positive.

Ages ago, I (half seriously) applied this to the "identification" of the Voynich MS with a genuine old manuscript, and it was three-factor.
1. It is written on old vellum. Let's assume that there is a 1% chance (factor 0.01) that this was previously unused old parchment used by a modern faker
2. It is described in a letter from 1637. Again we can arbitrarily assume a 1% chance that this is actually another MS
3. It has the genuine name of Tepenec in there. Again. 1% chance that this was added by a modern faker

One can argue about all three numbers. They are arbitrary and cannot be computed in reality.

In any case, this three-factor identification of the Voynich MS with a genuine old MS results in a false positive of 0.000001 (1 in a million).

Maybe you got the core idea for this thread from the word two factor authentication, but calling it that exact thing is misleading IMO. I guess what you are going for is - "The VMS combines features of a particular topic/well known picture from 2 different books that discuss the same topic." Kindof like the guy who wrote/drew the VMS wanted to combine 2 sources that talked about a certain thing, but deliberately made a mess out of it - thereby making notes and at the same time making the content near indecipherable to people who don't know about BOTH/ALL the sources.

If this is what you were going for, the idea looks good to me. Do post a few pictures/drawings showing the above mentioned points clearly. That way the discussion may move past the confusion the term is making.

Maybe I'm getting it all wrong, but it's intriguing if you extrapolate the idea to the text, especially when there are 2 dialects from the Currier times itself (even if its more of a smooth transition from one to the other). 

But this too gives me a bad feeling - if he combined images from 2/multiple different sources, he must've had access to the text in these sources too. But from the analysis of the VMS text, it looks a bit like non-linguistic (?filler) content too.. So maybe he used text from these sources he took pictures from, and deliberately threw away a lot of information to use it as base for creating filler text & give an illusion of language/grammar at the same time.. #justVMSthings 

JKP,

they are all collected on this page:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

The one that is very similar to the one in the Voynich MS is the top one in the table.

I added two more, informatlly,  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

The latter look more like his formal / Bohemian signature.

I'd rather say it's a sequence of Zip files.

(07-08-2020, 08:26 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
...

I added two more, informatlly,  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

The latter look more like his formal / Bohemian signature.

Ah, yes, thank you. I remember now. I remember that I was puzzled that the ones on the books had a clear "e" between the n and z at the end and the two posted informally on the forum, as well as the one from Knihy Mistra Albertina, have a stroke (rather than a clear rounded "e") that disappears into the "z".

Handwriting does sometimes vary, but there are certain things that change more than others, and that's not the kind of change that usually happens in signatures.

The one on the top of your Web page that has the rounded "e" also has a tail on the "i" and the others don't.

I had intended to analyze these more closely, but haven't found the time yet.