Statistics:
The probability of a random match for 70%+ words tends to zero. For example:
If we take 100 random combinations of 5-6 characters,
The chance that >70 will match the actual words of a particular language,
It is <0.0001% for any European language of the 15th century.
In the information provided here You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. the article matches 75%.
Could you tell me the reason for your indifference to my version? Is it just that everyone is convinced that they are right, which is why they don't pay attention to other options? Or perhaps the intrigue surrounding the Voynich manuscript is a banal marketing ploy to attract visitors to the library where the manuscript is kept, and to increase the prestige of programmer competitions for whose program will select the best code, thanks to which not 30% of the text will be "deciphered", but 35%, and many before me have already achieved results. not worse than mine?
For me, this is not an idle curiosity, but an existentially significant question. I am a very smart person who lived in poverty from childhood until adulthood without the Internet. Recognizing my interpretation as appropriate is paying attention to my intelligence, which will make me in demand in various scientific projects, which I really want.
Of course, I'm not pretending here that just because of my statements, I'm being treated as if everything has already been confirmed. But I think a visual demonstration of 75% of the words corresponding to dictionaries based on my interpretation is at least enough for discussion and criticism if I am wrong, or reasoned arguments pointing to my wrongness. I invite you to discuss this issue.
As I've shown in this You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view., using a mix of words from different languages you can create a somewhat meaningful text from almost any combination of characters. So, from my point of view you haven't decrypted any part of the Voynich Manuscript and to me the lack of interest in your solution is totally expected.
Please keep all posts relating to your theory in a single thread, as per the forum rules.
(07-07-2025, 09:07 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Please keep all posts relating to your theory in a single thread, as per the forum rules.
Sorry, I just didn't fully understand the site settings.
(07-07-2025, 09:01 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.As I've shown in this You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., using a mix of words from different languages you can create a somewhat meaningful text from almost any combination of characters. So, from my point of view you haven't decrypted any part of the Voynich Manuscript and to me the lack of interest in your solution is totally expected.
Could you introduce me to the algorithm of your translation? Arguments are reasoned when they can be verified based on the alphabet. For example, in that post, what is the alphabet? Could you show it to me? And how many languages are involved there? I use only three languages, and this is fully justified, since this practice was widespread at that time in medieval England. How many languages do you use? Thirty? There's a huge difference between three and thirty.
(07-07-2025, 09:01 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.As I've shown in this You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., using a mix of words from different languages you can create a somewhat meaningful text from almost any combination of characters. So, from my point of view you haven't decrypted any part of the Voynich Manuscript and to me the lack of interest in your solution is totally expected.
If you're not afraid, let's calculate how many words any of your algorithms recognizes, and how many words does my algorithm recognize from the same sample? And how many languages will be involved in each case. Do you agree?
(07-07-2025, 09:01 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.As I've shown in this You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., using a mix of words from different languages you can create a somewhat meaningful text from almost any combination of characters. So, from my point of view you haven't decrypted any part of the Voynich Manuscript and to me the lack of interest in your solution is totally expected.
Could you translate based on any of your algorithms, for example, the fragment that I translated? Then please provide your interpretation of the alphabet. Let's calculate what percentage of words you have deciphered, and how many languages you have used, as well as to what extent. Then let's compare your results with mine. I don't mind at all if you choose absolutely any algorithm you want (just not much more variable than mine, that is, so that, for example, each letter doesn't have a dozen options there). How do you see it?
(07-07-2025, 09:34 PM)Michael Obraztsov Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Could you introduce me to the algorithm of your translation? Arguments are reasoned when they can be verified based on the alphabet. For example, in that post, what is the alphabet? Could you show it to me? And how many languages are involved there? I use only three languages, and this is fully justified, since this practice was widespread at that time in medieval England. How many languages do you use? Thirty? There's a huge difference between three and thirty.
---
If you're not afraid, let's calculate how many words any of your algorithms recognizes, and how many words does my algorithm recognize from the same sample? And how many languages will be involved in each case. Do you agree?
You certainly can perform any calculations you want. I'm not sure I understand your questions, though, which "translation" and "algorithm" you are referring to, etc. If you are somehow under impression that I claim to have solved the Voynich Manuscript, I've made no such claim and I haven't "decoded" anything in the Voynich Manuscript, so far.
From the time spent on this forum I certainly know there are a lot of people here who are genuinely interested in any new original research related to the Voynich Manuscript. If you feel like there is lack of interest towards your solution, have you considered the possibility that it's just not particularly original?
(07-07-2025, 10:15 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (07-07-2025, 09:34 PM)Michael Obraztsov Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Could you introduce me to the algorithm of your translation? Arguments are reasoned when they can be verified based on the alphabet. For example, in that post, what is the alphabet? Could you show it to me? And how many languages are involved there? I use only three languages, and this is fully justified, since this practice was widespread at that time in medieval England. How many languages do you use? Thirty? There's a huge difference between three and thirty.
---
If you're not afraid, let's calculate how many words any of your algorithms recognizes, and how many words does my algorithm recognize from the same sample? And how many languages will be involved in each case. Do you agree?
You certainly can perform any calculations you want. I'm not sure I understand your questions, though, which "translation" and "algorithm" you are referring to, etc. If you are somehow under impression that I claim to have solved the Voynich Manuscript, I've made no such claim and I haven't "decoded" anything in the Voynich Manuscript, so far.
From the time spent on this forum I certainly know there are a lot of people here who are genuinely interested in any new original research related to the Voynich Manuscript. If you feel like there is lack of interest towards your solution, have you considered the possibility that it's just not particularly original?
About the unoriginality. Why talk in hints? If you are aware of the unoriginality of my case, could you point out exactly where my approach coincides with other people's approaches?
Of course, I understood what you didn't translate. However, you have made the argument that it is easy to combine anything with anything. I answered you with a counterargument: if it's easy, let's delve into this question. My solution is quite clear. If you think it's easy to do something like this, try it. Then please provide the alphabet, as I did.
Please read the discussion threads for other solutions. You have hundreds of rivals, over sixty of which are logged on this site.
Many of your rival Solvers have found hundreds or thousands of words in their chosen language. You are allowing multiple languages in your decryption, so it is even easier for you to find "matches". You are casting a wide net so of course you find something.