03-03-2016, 08:42 PM
![[Image: voynich-blue-orchid.jpg?w=680]](https://voynichlatin.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/voynich-blue-orchid.jpg?w=680)
![[Image: voynich-blue-orchid-roots.jpg?w=680]](https://voynichlatin.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/voynich-blue-orchid-roots.jpg?w=680)
![[Image: blue-orchid-roots.jpg?w=680]](https://voynichlatin.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/blue-orchid-roots.jpg?w=680)
03-03-2016, 08:48 PM
I grow orchids (I built a greenhouse).
Plant 87r doesn't look like an orchid, at least not the one you pictured. The VMS plant has narrow florets, the petals on the orchid are medium-wide. Orchids don't have scaly calyxes, and considering the attention given to roots in the VMS, the illustrator wouldn't have overlooked a detail as obvious and significant as those bead-like "arachnid-leg-shaped" roots.
Why did you leave the gallows character out of the word you "translated"? Do you consider it insignificant? A spaceholder? A modifier? A null?
Plant 87r doesn't look like an orchid, at least not the one you pictured. The VMS plant has narrow florets, the petals on the orchid are medium-wide. Orchids don't have scaly calyxes, and considering the attention given to roots in the VMS, the illustrator wouldn't have overlooked a detail as obvious and significant as those bead-like "arachnid-leg-shaped" roots.
Why did you leave the gallows character out of the word you "translated"? Do you consider it insignificant? A spaceholder? A modifier? A null?
03-03-2016, 09:14 PM
Stellar,
If you follow this link to the wiki page for diuris orchids, you will find two bits of information that you should really pay attention to:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
First, you will see that Diuris is native to Australia, with one species native to Timor.
I don't need to tell you that in the early/mid-15th century, when the Voynich was made, neither of these places had been "discovered" by Europeans.
Secondly, scrolling down, you will find a list of all the different species of diuris.
What should strike you is that next to each name is a date. This date tells you when the plant was named. As you can plainly see, the oldest use of the name Diuris is 1804. Before that date, nobody used the word "Diuris": the etymology is on the page I linked.
I want to believe that you can have the intellectual honesty to accept these simple facts, not as an attack, but as a straightforward explanation of why your translation doesn't work.
If you follow this link to the wiki page for diuris orchids, you will find two bits of information that you should really pay attention to:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
First, you will see that Diuris is native to Australia, with one species native to Timor.
I don't need to tell you that in the early/mid-15th century, when the Voynich was made, neither of these places had been "discovered" by Europeans.
Secondly, scrolling down, you will find a list of all the different species of diuris.
What should strike you is that next to each name is a date. This date tells you when the plant was named. As you can plainly see, the oldest use of the name Diuris is 1804. Before that date, nobody used the word "Diuris": the etymology is on the page I linked.
I want to believe that you can have the intellectual honesty to accept these simple facts, not as an attack, but as a straightforward explanation of why your translation doesn't work.
04-03-2016, 12:45 AM
Stellar- did you realise that your logo has "Tom' written on it, and that some of the pages you've posted are copyright to Tom O'Neil?
Of course anyone's entitled to write under a pen-name, and many Voynicheros do, in order to keep this hobby from intruding on their private lives - but that's a different thing from representing as your own something first published online by someone else.
Just so you know. This isn't an attack but an expression of concern.
Of course anyone's entitled to write under a pen-name, and many Voynicheros do, in order to keep this hobby from intruding on their private lives - but that's a different thing from representing as your own something first published online by someone else.
Just so you know. This isn't an attack but an expression of concern.
04-03-2016, 02:33 AM
What we see here is a common property of incorrect solutions.
Based on the number of degrees of freedom that the solution includes, one can get only so much 'plain text' out of it.
One degree of freedom everyone has is the mapping of Voynich MS characters to plain text. Here, we also have some nulls, and the additional freedom from anagramming.
Still, this usually does not allow for more than a dozen or so meaningful words.
Any sentences produced as part of any incorrect solution are completely unrelated fragments that make no sense.
People producing more than 10-15 words either have an enormous degree of freedom (Stojko realigning all word breaks and introducing all vowels, or Strong, defining a very large table of character mappings), or they don't show their method at all.
After the first dozen words, it becomes almost impossible to find anything more.
Here: one word picked out of an entire page, referring to a name of a herb that grows on the other side of the planet, and does not look like the illustration at all.
Based on the number of degrees of freedom that the solution includes, one can get only so much 'plain text' out of it.
One degree of freedom everyone has is the mapping of Voynich MS characters to plain text. Here, we also have some nulls, and the additional freedom from anagramming.
Still, this usually does not allow for more than a dozen or so meaningful words.
Any sentences produced as part of any incorrect solution are completely unrelated fragments that make no sense.
People producing more than 10-15 words either have an enormous degree of freedom (Stojko realigning all word breaks and introducing all vowels, or Strong, defining a very large table of character mappings), or they don't show their method at all.
After the first dozen words, it becomes almost impossible to find anything more.
Here: one word picked out of an entire page, referring to a name of a herb that grows on the other side of the planet, and does not look like the illustration at all.
04-03-2016, 02:57 AM
(03-03-2016, 08:48 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I grow orchids (I built a greenhouse).
Plant 87r doesn't look like an orchid, at least not the one you pictured. The VMS plant has narrow florets, the petals on the orchid are medium-wide. Orchids don't have scaly calyxes, and considering the attention given to roots in the VMS, the illustrator wouldn't have overlooked a detail as obvious and significant as those bead-like "arachnid-leg-shaped" roots.
Why did you leave the gallows character out of the word you "translated"? Do you consider it insignificant? A spaceholder? A modifier? A null?
JKP, you can read why I leave some Gallows letters out!
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(04-03-2016, 12:45 AM)Diane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Stellar- did you realise that your logo has "Tom' written on it, and that some of the pages you've posted are copyright to Tom O'Neil?
Of course anyone's entitled to write under a pen-name, and many Voynicheros do, in order to keep this hobby from intruding on their private lives - but that's a different thing from representing as your own something first published online by someone else.
Just so you know. This isn't an attack but an expression of concern.
Purchase the book Diane; I have my photo in it and I have been a member for several years at createspace. I don't take your comment personally. I like my logo lol!
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.