| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
|
|
| Gemini nymphs after 6 |
|
Posted by: R. Sale - 24-12-2021, 08:09 PM - Forum: Imagery
- Replies (2)
|
 |
VMs Gemini has some interesting 'nymphs' between 6 o'clock and 9 o'clock in the outer ring. Several of these characters are clothed and ostensibly male. Not the more typical VMs nymph. Also, for some, the style of clothing appears interesting, as it looks like a tunic.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
The term 'tunic' turns up in a number of ninja threads that seem to be concerned with the primary male characters of Gemini and Sagittarius inside the respective medallions. I haven't found where these secondary characters have been brought into the discussion. Any guidance appreciated.
Furthermore, in relation to recent discussions, there is the possibility that these characters fit into the myth of Castor and Pollux, leading up to their catasterism. Perhaps this has been considered previously?
|
|
|
| Siderial connections: masculine |
|
Posted by: R. Sale - 20-12-2021, 08:20 PM - Forum: Astrology & Astronomy
- Replies (15)
|
|
The general process is called catasterism. It is the process of conversion of a mythical person (animal or object) into something that is seen in the stars <of the night sky>, such as a constellation or star.
This is a search request specifically for stars that can be shown to be masculine. Preferably in a medieval European, historical and traditional context.
Examples so far: Arcturus, Castor and Pollux
|
|
|
|
| Plant's gender pronouns |
|
Posted by: Ranceps - 18-12-2021, 09:00 PM - Forum: Voynich Talk
- Replies (2)
|
 |
If we are to discuss each plant in the "herbal" section of the MS, did anybody tried to compare the gender pronouns of the "known plants". I mean the whole text, if it contains some similarities between the "known plant" from another page. It's normal that we speak about the plant using gender as pronouns.
Maybe we can find something in the vords that's similar to other pages and we can use that to find the gender pronouns in other texts. That's something I wondered for a long time... like I wondered about the phrase from old Herbals, the plants are often introduces as "The plant name is X" (in latin: Nomen istius herbe (like in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. Of course, the plants there are hardly recognizable from the picture, but the text helps a lot to understand what plant we are talking about...).
Did anybody tried to find a connection between the gender pronouns or that phrase being in most of the "herbal section"?
|
|
|
|
| Transitional Probabilities and Repetitive Loops |
|
Posted by: pfeaster - 14-12-2021, 10:17 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (3)
|
 |
A few months ago I spent a while looking at first-order transitional probabilities in the VM -- e.g., if all we know is that the current glyph is [d], what's the likelihood of the next glyph being [o]? I You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. about this at the time, but I'd like to summarize one set of observations here because they've continued to tug at my curiosity and I'm not sure how to explore them any further.
Transitional probabilities are radically different for Currier A and Currier B -- so much so that there seems to be no value in working them out for the VM as a whole.
So let's start with Currier B, and also with the glyph [d]. What's the most probable sequence of glyphs to follow from that, ignoring spaces, as if we were using an extremely crude auto-complete algorithm?
[d] --> [y] (63.71%)
[y] --> [q] (28.11%)
[q] --> [o] (97.69%)
[o] --> [k] (30.31%)
[k] --> [e] group (41.86%); probability of that [e] group then being specifically [ee] (54.28%)
[ee] --> [d] (39.79%)
In other words, the most probable path forward turns out to be a closed loop: [qokeedyqokeedyqokeedy....]. Of course, this resembles a common repetitive pattern we actually see in Currier B. A single choice of alternate transition would typically lead to a familiar-looking "path" such as these:
[qokeey.qokeedy]
[qokaiin.okeedy]
[qokeedy.chedy]
[qolkeedy.qokeedy]
[qotedy.qokeedy]
If we try the same thing in Currier A, again starting with [d], we get:
[d] --> [a] (50.40%)
[a] --> [i] group (51.96%); probability of that [i] group then being specifically [ii] (75.52%)
[ii] --> [n] (94.80%)
[n] --> [ch] (21.25%)
[ch] --> [o] (45.67%)
[o] --> [l] (24.99%)
[l] --> [d] (21.92%)
Hence, a different closed loop: [daiincholdaiincholdaiincholdaiin.....]. But this time even some of the most probable transitions are still less than 22% probable: [n] --> [ch] and [l] --> [d]. And if we examine line-position statistics, the most probable transitions actually vary from point to point, so that there seem to be separate, non-overlapping [chol] and [daiin] regions. Thus, a more nuanced analysis might predict [cholcholchol...daiindaiindaiin] over the course of a line, or maybe something even more varied.
Torsten Timm You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. three vord "series" -- a [daiin] series, an [ol] series including [chol], and a [chedy] series including [qokeedy] -- and finds that vords tend to be more common the more closely they resemble [daiin], [ol], or [chedy]. But within each Timm series, the vord most often found repeating identically is the specific one corresponding to the inferred loop sequence:
[daiin.daiin] ×13
[chol.chol] ×23
[qokeedy.qokeedy] ×19
All of which has led me to wonder whether Voynichese might default to some sort of looping pattern whenever there's minimal "signal" present, analogous to an unmodulated carrier signal. But I can't think of a good way to move from that vague notion to any more concrete kind of experiment, and I also worry that there's some circular logic in here somewhere. I don't *think* the commonness of specific vords such as [qokeedy] could itself be responsible for the patterns these vords seem best to exemplify -- but if it were, I suppose that would be one way to discount this line of speculation.
I'll also admit that first-order transitional probabilities don't have very good predictive power. I tried using them as a basis for generating random text and came up with this for Currier B (with spaces inserted wherever two adjacent glyphs most often have one):
qol.dy.dor.ol.Shey.or.Shokaiin.Shotalkar.chedy.Shy.chopcholkedy.Sheokeey.s.chcKhdy.chy.okeor.
odytey.odytodain.SheotShey.pchdy.keedy.dal.Shdy.Shetaiin.ol.ol.ody.dytchedy.qol.ol.Shekeedain.
Shedy.qol.l.chedy.dytar.olal.dy.qotey.qosal.cheokaiin.y.otchokchokeedain.cheey.y.pcholkar.Shar.
cheeotchedy.keedar.ain.cheeyty.Sheey.ol.chcKhoteey.l.dy.kaiin
That's not very good pseudo-Voynichese. Note in particular the frequent vords containing multiple gallows.
But if we advance to second-order transitional probabilities, the [qokeedy] and [chol/daiin] loops persist, and the results of generating random text start to feel a little more plausible (to me, at least):
ol.qokeodar.ar.okaiin.Shkchedy.Shdal.qotam.ytol.dal.cheokeedy.chkal.Shedy.qokair.odain.al.ol.daiin.
cheal.qokeeey.lkain.chcPhedy.kchdy.cheey.otar.cheor.aiin.Shedy.dal.dochey.opchol.okchy.Sheoar.ol.
oeey.otcheol.dy.chShy.lkar.ain.okchedy.l.chkedy.oteedar.ShecKhey.okaiin.chor.olteodar.okal.qokeShedy.
ol.ol.Sheey.kain.cheky.chey.chol.chedy
With these randomly generated text examples, I don't mean to imply I favor a stochastic-process solution -- I'm just trying to illustrate how well or poorly a relatively simple transitional-probability model fits what we're used to Voynichese looking like. These examples aren't based on any "word structure" model as such. They also ignore all line-position patterning.
Apologies as always for any and all reinvented wheels.
|
|
|
|
| Biocodicology - A Deeper Dive |
|
Posted by: MichelleL11 - 14-12-2021, 05:56 PM - Forum: Physical material
- Replies (133)
|
|
Hi, All:
I haven't really shared my background here on the board but I'm going to now to hopefully gain some "expert" credentials in this area. I have been in the biotech industry basically since the time it was possible to patent biotech inventions (1989). I do a significant amount of technical drafting support for companies that utilize all the sequencing technologies involved in biocodicology -- but for medical diagnosis and treatments. Since I'm in the patenting business, I learn many cutting edge techniques -- some of which I can't share because they are confidential.
The biocodicology area has moved significantly since the 2009 article cited in the general chat thread.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.is an article from 2019 (for free) that is a better representation of the present state of the area -- although since I have done a full review of what's out there in my Voynich work I do find this review a bit optimistic, but it is a good general introduction to the techniques available.
I will say that biocodicology on the whole is behind the times significantly from what is happening in the medical world -- but that is not surprising given (1) funding challenges, (2) much lower number of labs performing this work, and (3) the understandable abhorrence of "destructive" analysis for historical objects. Obviously, none of these things are as formable of an issue when applied to medical sequencing technique development.
I'm going to add (over time -- appreciate the patience!) to this thread with reviews of significant publications in this area. In a bit of a spoiler, I will say that the results most strongly point to all the technical issues in performing and interpreting the results that have been obtained rather than providing any certain answers. But it is worthwhile exercise and one that I'd like to share with the board (at least in part to try to "pay back" all the technical help I've gotten in my Voynich research from here).
In each case, I will attempt to relate the results of the publication to possibilities for the Voynich (as that was the goal of my review -- which is complete but not in an easily shared form). Hopefully after the string of review posts are done, the board members can come away with a better understanding of what can and can't be done. But, if there is any truth in biotechnology, it continually gets better and better at solving significant nucleic acid (DNA, RNA) and protein detection problems. Thus, I have all expectations that someday these techniques will be useful to the Voynich -- but the twenty years prediction may not be far off, given the general issues above and the specific issues that will be discussed in the reviews.
The first review post to come soon.
|
|
|
|
| Is the VMS a pamphlet of the bastards ? (theory) |
|
Posted by: bi3mw - 14-12-2021, 01:00 PM - Forum: Voynich Talk
- Replies (24)
|
 |
Here an article in the NZZ about a Voynich theory from the beginning of the year. I stumbled over it when I tried to change a Wikipedia entry in the German Wikipedia about the VMS. The authors are Lea Carl-Krüsi and Christoph Eggenberger. Carl-Krüsi is a freelance art historian. Eggenberger was titular professor of art history at the University of Zurich and head of the manuscript department of the Zurich Central Library.
Quote:Wikipedia (VMS)
The two art historians can contribute nothing to the decipherment of the text, but recognize a clear concern in the sequence of the pictures: "It is a plea for the offspring of the nobility, conceived with women from the people, the so-called bastards". Under the guise of botanical symbols, the plight of the disenfranchised and disinherited between the nobility and the people is depicted. "In botany, the most splendid plants - entities sprung from the imagination - are the result of crossbreeding. So the conclusion is obvious: the same rules apply in human biology as well."
Unfortunately, the Google translator does not work with the NZZ page. That's why I have linked the original German language page here.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I think the theory of Carl-Krüsi and Eggenberger is a bit far-fetched, especially since it is based on nothing but assumptions. There is probably also no comparative picture material that would prove the assumptions somehow. However, one should assume that at least Eggenberger is an expert who knows what he is talking about. What do you think ?
|
|
|
|
| Classifying False Voynich Decipherment "Solutions" |
|
Posted by: Mark Knowles - 04-12-2021, 04:12 PM - Forum: Voynich Talk
- Replies (50)
|
|
In discussing a Voynich prize the issue of handling a large number of false decipherment "solutions" was raised.
I get the impression, though I haven't looked in depth at many false solutions, that they have a lot of common and so very similar flaws. Whether the theory is proto-turkic or proto-romance or some kind of vulgar latin it seems they have a "degree of freedom" problem such that there is sufficient flexibility in interpretation that a theory can be made to fit. It also appears that the process by which the theories were created has a lot in common.
It is my opinion that the real solution will have very little in common with these kinds of theories both in the method by which it was arrived at and the structure and nature of the actual solution.
However in order to reduce the time taken investigating false solutions it could be worth classifying them and so when a new theory is presented it can be classified as for example a "Cheshire solution" or other type. One can then point to the flawed method by which the solution was constructed and the flawed widely open to interpretation, inherently highly flexible solution structure.
The degrees of freedom allowed in such solutions that we even see in the anagram "Artificial Intelligence" theory should be a warning that "there is something rotten in the state of Denmark"(apologies to any Danes; it's a Shakespeare quote) With sufficient degrees of freedom in interpretation then any theory will fit. As an absurd example if I postulate that every Voynich symbol can represent any letter in the alphabet then I can interpret the text to read whatever I wish. Whilst that is certainly an extreme example it appears to me that so many false solutions have such a large degree of freedom.
Managing these false solutions may help in the construction of standard tests for these theories.
So I see the handling of a large number of false solutions as unlikely to be problematic.
|
|
|
|
| Heraldic expansions |
|
Posted by: R. Sale - 18-11-2021, 09:39 PM - Forum: Voynich Talk
- No Replies
|
|
Heraldic investigations have expanded VMs interpretations in a number of areas. Traditional heraldic interpretations have opened up new aspects of VMs understanding. The traditional use of heraldic elements in the VMs shows that the artist knew the tradition.
Armorial heraldry - lines of division: the nebuly line. Used in VMs cosmos (f68v3), VMs critter (f80v), and elsewhere in Quire 13, with a few scattered in the plants section.
Armorial heraldry - standard shield patterns known as ordinaries and sub-ordinaries. Used as tub patterns around the outer ring of VMs Pisces and in Aries. E.g. the chevrons on Pisces.
Ecclesiastical heraldry - red, white, or green colored hats used on the zodiac nymphs; red for cardinals, green for abbots, white for Premonstratensians. [While Premonstratensians faded in much of western Europe, they held on in the Burgundian state through the C-14 dates.]
Historical heraldry - the combination of armorial heraldry and ecclesiastical heraldry, red hats and blue stripes, the origin of the tradition of the cardinal's red galero. The combination is found on a nymph in the inner ring of White Aries.
Armorial heraldry - the heraldic tradition of most honorable placement on an insignia also plays a part in the White Aries illustration.
Armorial heraldry - the types of tincture: papelonny, a traditional fur. Used in VMs Pisces and Dark Aries.
With all these heraldic elements in use, perhaps there is reason to consider that the VMs artist was capable of heraldic *thinking*, by which I mean heraldic canting. Used in the placement of the papelonny patterns to structurally confirm, beyond question, the historical identification of the Fieschi popes [French: pape. (Get it?)], they correspond in quadrant and in sphere with the blue-striped, armorial patterns on White Aries.
Perhaps someone will suggest how other areas of investigation, such as alchemy or astrology, have made similar contributions to VMs interpretation.
|
|
|
|
| A disquieting thought |
|
Posted by: davidjackson - 18-11-2021, 07:27 PM - Forum: Voynich Talk
- Replies (12)
|
 |
In the shower the other morning (where I do my best thinking) I wondered whether evidence that the grammar changes in concordance with scribal hands gives weight to the theory that the text is meaningless.
In other words, if there are different scribes, and each scribe has a slightly different grammar, are they all using their own interpretation of the same generating mechanism to create slightly different nonsense texts?
If they were working off the same encoding mechanism, then you wouldn't see these differences, as the text would always be encoded in the same fashion.
Of course, we could explain this away by suggesting that each scribe had their own style of writing, and it's just the way they put together the underlying plaintext that causes the differences.
|
|
|
|
| Revisiting A Voynich Prize |
|
Posted by: Mark Knowles - 17-11-2021, 07:47 PM - Forum: Voynich Talk
- Replies (75)
|
|
There was a thread on this topic from some time ago, but it has long since been closed.
I was reading about the many prizes that there are in Mathematics and my thinking came back again to why there shouldn't be a prize for Voynich decipherment.
Maybe some people believe that prizes should not be awarded in Mathematics or any field and likewise should not be rewarded for Voynich research. But if one thinks that it is right to have them in Mathematics, but not in Voynich research then one has to ask why.
It is often suggested that a prize would attract the wrong kind of people and just lead to more nonsense theories wasting researchers time and distracting from good research. However does this happen with Mathematical or other prizes? I don't doubt they also receive plenty of nonsense theories. Why do they have prizes if prizes are such a bad idea?
From a personal point of view if I manage to decipher the manuscript and there is no financial reward of any kind at the end of it I will feel cheated. I have put a lot of time into it and it has been enjoyable, but that shouldn't preclude some financial benefit. Academics doing research in many areas make a living from it, so it does not seem radical that people researching in this area should be precluded from making any money out of it.
Ultimately any such prize would have to be funded from public donation or by a private individual. But if such finance existed it does not make sense to me for it to be turned down.
I am aware that there is strong opposition to this idea, nevertheless I thought I would reintroduce the question and I daresay I will raise it again in the future.
|
|
|
|
|