The Voynich Ninja

(01-10-2016, 09:49 PM)stellar Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(01-10-2016, 09:40 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Stellar wrote: Four adds up to a 6 in English using numerology,  6+6+3+9=12+12=3+3=6!


This isn't the way it's usually done. Usually all the numbers are added singly, and then, if it's more than ten, the individual digits are added again. You don't usually pair up the numbers in the process of adding them as you have done in the above example.

If you are using a different system from usual (and from what you implied earlier), then you should explain it before posting all these sums.


In his article on Celtic numerology, Mike Nichols added them the same way I added them and this is the system I saw in numerology books I read years ago. As you can see, it doesn't jive with the way you are now saying you do it:



So, if you are using a different system, then clearly explain it before posting the numbers and state your sources for using a less conventional system.



I notice you have created another youtube video on this.

I really don't care whether your ideas are right or wrong, you're entitled to your opinions, except for the fact that you have commercial ambitions and are promoting books, in which case you have a responsibility to your buyers that I'm not sure you are honoring.

I only created one youtube video and can you please post it here.  Also I'm using Pythagorean numerology.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

You told us you were using Welsh numerology, not someone else's Pythagorean numerology calculator. I thought you had actually done some research (real research) on Welsh numerology.

So you are using a Pythagorean numerology calculator programmed by someone else (are you even sure of the algorithm being used?) and then applying Welsh words to the result?

(01-10-2016, 09:55 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(01-10-2016, 09:49 PM)stellar Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(01-10-2016, 09:40 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Stellar wrote: Four adds up to a 6 in English using numerology,  6+6+3+9=12+12=3+3=6!


This isn't the way it's usually done. Usually all the numbers are added singly, and then, if it's more than ten, the individual digits are added again. You don't usually pair up the numbers in the process of adding them as you have done in the above example.

If you are using a different system from usual (and from what you implied earlier), then you should explain it before posting all these sums.


In his article on Celtic numerology, Mike Nichols added them the same way I added them and this is the system I saw in numerology books I read years ago. As you can see, it doesn't jive with the way you are now saying you do it:



So, if you are using a different system, then clearly explain it before posting the numbers and state your sources for using a less conventional system.



I notice you have created another youtube video on this.

I really don't care whether your ideas are right or wrong, you're entitled to your opinions, except for the fact that you have commercial ambitions and are promoting books, in which case you have a responsibility to your buyers that I'm not sure you are honoring.

I only created one youtube video and can you please post it here.  Also I'm using Pythagorean numerology.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

You told us you were using Welsh numerology, not someone else's Pythagorean numerology calculator. I thought you had actually done some research (real research) on Welsh numerology.

So you are using a Pythagorean numerology calculator programmed by someone else (are you even sure of the algorithm being used?) and then applying Welsh words to the result?

JKP Source on Celtic Numerology:

Quote:By now, some of my more thoughtful readers may think they see some
         inconsistency in my approach.  Why have I gone to so much trouble to
         point up the flaws in traditional systems of numerology (even going so
         far  as to  suggest an  entirely  new system),  only to  fall back  on
         interpretations of  the numbers  that are  strictly traditional?   The
         reason is this:   all of my  objections thus far have  been limited to
         METHODOLOGY.    When  it comes  to  interpreting  the  meaning of  the
         numbers, I have no  quarrel with the traditional approach,  since here
         we enter the field of universal symbolism.  All systems of
         numerology, be  they Hebrew,  modern, Oriental,  or whatever,  tend to
         attach the same  interpretive meaning to the numbers.   When Three Dog
         Night sings, 'One is  the loneliest number that you'll  ever know...',
         it  is a statement which is  immediately understood and agreed upon by
         people from  widely diverse cultures.  And the same holds true for all
         other numbers, for we are here dealing with archetypal symbols.

             It is worth repeating that, although I believe this system to have
         a firm theoretical basis, it is still in an embryonic state -- highly
         tentative, highly speculative.   To the  best of my  knowledge, it  is
         also  an original contribution to the field of numerology.  While some
         writers (notably Robert Graves in 'The White Goddess') have dealt with
         the numerical values  of Ogham letters, I believe this  article is the
         first instance of employing it specifically as a system of numerology.
         I have spent many long hours working with Celtic numerology -- putting
         abstract  theory  to use  in practical  application  -- but  much work
         remains to be  done.  For this  reason, I would be happy  to hear from
         readers who are interested in the subject and who would like to
         share their own experiences and thoughts.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Sorry, am I missing something or is the only correlation between your Voynichese and its Welsh translation the fact that they have the same numerology sum? Because that is basically anagramming and we all know where that leads us.

Also, you seem to be missing some Voynich glyphs, there are several more commonly accepted glyphs not reflected in your table.

I'd also suggest that a 16th century Welshman (or even Mr Dee himself) who invented a new script which transliterated Welsh into this script wouldn't be using a flat modern numerology table... they'd be using a gematria instead.

So your theory is that the scribe who invented the new script dropped eight letters whilst doing so (the medieval Welsh alphabet, whilst Roman, doubled up on letters to reach a 29 letter alphabet, but you only have 22 glyphs). He then decided not to use a direct correlation between the Welsh numerology encoding table and the Voynichese one. Finally, he didn't use gematria but a flat numerology table instead.

Sorry, not buying it.

(02-10-2016, 10:09 PM)david Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Sorry, am I missing something or is the only correlation between your Voynichese and its Welsh translation the fact that they have the same numerology sum? Because that is basically anagramming and we all know where that leads us.

Also, you seem to be missing some Voynich glyphs, there are several more commonly accepted glyphs not reflected in your table.

I'd also suggest that a 16th century Welshman (or even Mr Dee himself) who invented a new script which transliterated Welsh into this script wouldn't be using a flat modern numerology table... they'd be using a gematria instead.

So your theory is that the scribe who invented the new script dropped eight letters whilst doing so (the medieval Welsh alphabet, whilst Roman, doubled up on letters to reach a 29 letter alphabet, but you only have 22 glyphs). He then decided not to use a direct correlation between the Welsh numerology encoding table and the Voynichese one. Finally, he didn't use gematria but a flat numerology table instead.

Sorry, not buying it.

David,
1) The system is not a form of anagrams!  It is Voynichese and its Welsh translation the fact that they have the same numerology sum is true David.

2) My table is not done yet true and I need to add four more glyph's to it.

3) Just do a search in google and you will find many links associating Dee with Pythagorean Numerology.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.


4) Dee was born to a Welsh man and it is purported that he collected welsh books.  The welsh letters still are equivalent to the Pythagorean table.

Quote:William Salesbury his Dictionarie in Englishe & Welshe, or Brytishe. 4o London 1547 :
Dee’s copy is now TCD, EE.e.32 (formerly C.10.17). At the head of the titlepage is ‘John Dee’. In the first half of the book, up to sig. K, he extensively annotated and corrected it; in some instances where Salesbury had put words of English origin in the ‘Camraec’ column, Dee supplied a Welsh word and occasionally, where Salesbury left a blank, he supplied an English equivalent. He also corrected equivalents in both languages. Later owned by abp. Ussher. See R. G. Gruffydd and R. J. Roberts, ‘John Dee’s additions to William Salesbury’s Dictionary’, Transactions of the Honourable Society of Cymmrodorion, n.s. 7 (2001), 19–43.  
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

And finally this table resembles voynich glyph's.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(30-09-2016, 03:46 AM)stellar Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I found additional evidence which supports my method and I can say that John Dee was a perfect genius.  The inner circle of folio 70r1 there is a complex form of Pi Numerology using the cipher he designed, which I decoded.  Pi runs counterclockwise in a sequence of six digits, (i.e. 3.14159) which uses one Welsh word for five, (i.e. Mhum) and a Roman Numeral IV for 9.  Everything adds up using the cipher which corresponds to a dual method of Pythagorean and Pi numerological systems.  This is where the Cipher meets a proof!

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

translation of words meaning from this picture is like in the picture bellow


maybe is helpful for your number teory

(24-09-2020, 06:49 PM)JoeHughes53hQP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I've been studying all about this theory for 3 days now) it's very interesting. If you have any additional resources I will be very grateful if you PM them to me!

He has been banned from the forum, however you can find him in many places. For example, he is currently on the Voynich subreddit promoting a new theory about 7-sided dice.

All the different theories are mutually exclusive, right?

(This is how conspiracy theories can be busted too - to explain all the facts, a whole lot of unlikely and mutually exclusive stuff has to happen at the same time)