| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 346 online users.
» 4 Member(s) | 340 Guest(s)
Bing, Google, Mark Knowles
|
| Latest Threads |
Question about unicity di...
Forum: Analysis of the text
Last Post: oshfdk
2 hours ago
» Replies: 10
» Views: 260
|
Getting close to a source...
Forum: Imagery
Last Post: MarcoP
6 hours ago
» Replies: 183
» Views: 17,694
|
Transliteration-related i...
Forum: Analysis of the text
Last Post: davidd
10 hours ago
» Replies: 41
» Views: 13,772
|
Sleeve focus thread
Forum: Imagery
Last Post: Juan_Sali
Yesterday, 11:45 PM
» Replies: 115
» Views: 57,281
|
Tainted Grail: The Fall o...
Forum: Fiction, Comics, Films & Videos, Games & other Media
Last Post: bi3mw
Yesterday, 09:01 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 71
|
Generally about proposed ...
Forum: Analysis of the text
Last Post: bi3mw
Yesterday, 03:43 PM
» Replies: 46
» Views: 3,348
|
sorted anagrams
Forum: Analysis of the text
Last Post: extent_of_foxes
Yesterday, 01:48 PM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 147
|
Historical ciphers, when ...
Forum: Analysis of the text
Last Post: davidd
Yesterday, 01:47 PM
» Replies: 23
» Views: 860
|
Favorite Plant Tournament...
Forum: Voynich Talk
Last Post: Koen G
21-05-2025, 08:26 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 102
|
Favorite Plant Tournament...
Forum: Voynich Talk
Last Post: Koen G
21-05-2025, 08:12 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 83
|
|
|
| There are 45 containers in the Small Plants section |
|
Posted by: VViews - 26-10-2017, 07:18 AM - Forum: Approved blocks
- Replies (5)
|
 |
The Small Plants section, actually composed of two groups of folios (88r-99r1 and 99r-102v1) features a total of 45 containers.
The breakdown of containers and nearby items is the following:
88r
1) 5 items
2) 4 items
3) 3 items
88v-r2
1) 4 items
2) 3 items
3) 3 items
4) 4 items
5) 3 items
6) 3 items
7) 4 items
8) 2 items
9) 6 items
10) 4 items
89v2
1) 5 items
2) 3 items
3) 4 items
89v1
1) 3 items
2) 3 items
99r
1) 12 items
2) 7 items
3) 7 items
4) 1 item
99v
1) 9 items
2) 6 items
3) 5 items
4) 1 item
100r
1) 11 items
2) 5 items
100v-101r2
1) 13 items
2)10 items
3) 10 items
4) 9 items
101v2
1) 9 items
2) 9 items
3) 10 items
101v1-102r2
1) 1 item
2) 1item
3) 2 items
4) 3 items (or 2 +frog)
5) 5 items
6) 2 items
102v2
1) 14 items (or 13 + cube)
2) 5 items
102v1
1) 5 items
2) 3 items
|
|
|
| Ars Alembica |
|
Posted by: R. Sale - 14-10-2017, 11:35 PM - Forum: Voynich Talk
- No Replies
|
 |
A distillation of ideas:
Recently there were several discussions and comments about the art of distillation, both in a physical, mechanistic sense and also in a more investigative and methodological interpretation. Distillation is a method of physical separation, using heat, of the more volatile materials, done within an enclosed system that allows for the collection and condensation of the distillate. Ideologically, distillation is a process of selection based on a set of criteria determined by the investigator. We all do it. In any proposition, we all select the best examples to demonstrate a point of discussion. How else can facts be established? Of course, the problem in VMs research often comes, as in a recent publication, where facts are said to be established, when they clearly are not.
The process of selection in such cases may be referred to as “cherry picking”. That is the presentation of a few examples, which may be random, that follow a particular set of criteria, which is otherwise unable to produce useful data. A few scattered words “translated” do not constitute a valid method of interpretation. Failed selective processes are sometimes referred to a category called: Garbage in; garbage out (GIGO). If you put garbage into a process of investigation, you won’t be getting cherries out. Furthermore, this does not address the significance of potential flaws in the nature of the investigative, selection process. You can put good VMs data in and get garbage out. The selection process needs to produce more than examples of tautological validity. The examples need to have a functional aspect that opens the possibility for further investigation.
VMs investigation has a long history of apparent failure. All attempts to read it have failed. All investigations of its origins have come up short. The proposed examples for translation are not really cherries at all. The selections were apparently flawed. The process of selection may not be valid. Nevertheless, taking the conclusion that all investigations based on specific selection of examples are necessarily invalidated would be, in fact, a flawed syllogism. Nothing requires that the process of distillation begin with garbage. And rather than have the specific process of selection be determined by the investigator, as happens more often in linguistic investigation, let it be determined by the independent sources of real, historical representations.
Distillation is a process of selection. The art of distillation is in knowing the proper materials and in finding the correct process for their selection. This is, perhaps, best illustrated by an example – and let that selection be one of the more significant, recent discoveries; the comparison (by E. Velinska in 2014) of VMs You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. with the Oresme version of the cosmos. Let’s briefly examine that comparison.
The cosmos illustrated in the Oresme diagram is concerned with the presence of the four elements: earth, air, fire and water. The central sphere is divided; half goes to water and a quarter each to earth and air. This sphere is then surrounded by stars. This type of sphere has other examples, but in combination with the starry background, there is an increased similarity between the VMs and Oresme examples. There is an alternate structure for medieval cosmic representations based on concentric circles for all the moon, sun, planets, and stars representing the music of the spheres.
In the comparison of the VMs drawing with the Oresme illustration, the similarity of the central sphere is good, the comparison of the starry field is fair, the correspondence of the outer boundary is poor. That is, it appears to be a poor comparison on a strictly visual basis. In the comparison of the Oresme and VMs You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. selections, what is the weakest area of comparison? It is the elaborate, circular, outer ring of the Oresme cloud band and the plain nebuly line of the VMs representation. [The VMs also has curved, spoke-like banners connecting to a larger, circular band, all filled in with written text.]
The weakness of the VMs diagram is the absence of a cloud band similar to that of the Oresme original. Such a cloud band was later discovered by D. Hoffmann in the VMs central rosette. The basic structure of the VMs cloud band, which is based on an alternating scallop-shell pattern, is very similar to the Oresme original. It even has blue paint. If it were possible to combine this cloud band from the central rosette with the sphere and stars of VMs f68v, this would greatly strengthen the similarities of this comparison. They are not connected physically, but can they be connected ideologically? The parts are there that would represent a copy of the Oresme version of the cosmos more closely than any other historical example presently known. Is ideological connection a possibility?
Here is where the ars comes in. It is in the choice of selections. VMs You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is not some anachronistic view of the Andromeda galaxy. Such proposals reveal a lack of basic understanding of medieval scientific works such as Oresme and the other sources. But that is how the process goes if we start with the wrong selections. The ars is one of two things. It is either a strict matter of creation by the investigator without intent and/or content in the source. Or it is a matter of intentional construction on the page by some historical source, a person or persons who produced the VMs.
While some will automatically negate the possibility of such an ideological connection, I would say that the matter can not be determined on the basis of a single example. Both of the necessary elements to reconstruct a most interesting, cosmic illustration do exist in the VMs. It is a question of whether the potential connection is present. So rather than one example of such a connection, here are four questions that open various inquiries into similar situations.
Can Oresme’s cosmos be reconstructed with VMs parts? [As above]
Do some of the tub patterns from VMs Pisces and Aries pages correspond with traditional heraldic insignia?
What is the historical origin of the Roman Catholic tradition of the cardinal’s red galero?
Can heraldic canting confirm historical identification in the VMs?
All answers are based on tradition and historical information prior to 1400. All answers are found in the VMs illustrations, but have been visually altered, separated, hidden or obfuscated in some way, while at the same time secretly retaining the standard positioning and confirming their identity through proper placement according to tradition, similar design, essential color and so on. In each case some trickery was used. In each case the construction was intentional. The radial versus non-radial interpretation of the orientation of two blue-striped tub patterns on VMs White Aries is a prime example. It is a clear example of the use of an optical illusion.
When conducted properly, distillation will normally produce a more concentrated solution. No pretence has been made to suggest that this solution is sufficiently concentrated to crystallize at present. However the process itself is surely not inherently flawed, as some apparently perceive it to be. Many selections may have failed, but specific selection is not ineluctably tied to failure. It is simply a fact that the results derived are highly dependent on the specific nature of the starting materials. Garbage in will always give you garbage out. Garbage in will not give you roses. However roses in will give you rose water. We don’t have to put garbage in. Surely it is better to use VMs images that can be tied to historical illustrations and traditions – like Oresme’s cosmos. Better yet in the pairings of the VMs Zodiac’s Pisces through Cancer. It’s hard to get garbage to pair up like that. Perhaps a container full of Nikes washed ashore. No emotive exhalation will change it. If it is assumed that the VMs author has provided this sort of hidden information, a trail of breadcrumbs, does it also have to follow that these are glow-in-the-dark breadcrumbs that are plain for all to see? Clearly in some parts the clues are paired. That should work in the daylight. However, if an investigator can neither name or identify the heraldic fur of papelonny, it is unlikely to be discovered or recognized among the VMs examples – thus putting the matter of heraldic canting totally beyond that investigator’s reach. Productive distillation can only proceed if the proper materials can be found.
|
|
|
|
| Theorems on letters |
|
Posted by: Davidsch - 14-10-2017, 01:44 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (13)
|
 |
DS Theorem one on 13.10.2017
Any translation attempt that includes the EVA letter [P] or the EVA letter [F] and
converts it directly in any other character or group of characters of another language, is wrong.
That being posed, the first word on f1r can not start with the EVA letter [P] being translated into a Latin P.
DS Theorem two. 14.10.2017: The Eva letter [P] and Eva letter [F] are a signalling letter.
|
|
|
|
| First words on folio 1r |
|
Posted by: -JKP- - 13-10-2017, 07:54 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (17)
|
|
Patrick Lockerby claims on his blog that the first words in the Voynich Manuscript are these words (which he says are Latin):
Peractum es con itaque …
He reasserted this translation on the ninja forum on this thread:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
On August 2, 2017, I pointed out that his translation is not Latin, that it only looks vaguely like Latin mixed with French:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Despite the fact that this is clearly demonstrable as not being Latin, Lockerby again asserted on Nick Pelling's blog on October 13th, 2017 that his translation is Latin.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
So he continues to believe and to promote the idea that he has created a Latin translation, even though there is no Latin (not even fractured Latin or note-format Latin) in his translation.
Some history... is this an original idea?
First of all, the idea that the VMS is abbreviated Latin is not unique to Lockerby or Gibbs, not even close. The idea is very very old because the text has many Latin characters mixed with Latin abbreviation symbols. In fact, that's why Vwords like "doary" get translated as "Taurus". It is because the "9" character at the end, in Latin, would be translated as "-us" or "-um". I've posted about these Latin abbreviations many times on my blogs prior to Lockerby's and Gibb's translations and I don't consider the idea to be a "discovery" because there's still no evidence that the text expands into intelligible Latin and Latin abbreviations are common knowledge to those who are familiar with medieval scribal conventions.
Yulia May ("searcher" on our forum) made a very creditable attempt to try to expand the text into Latin long before Lockerby and Gibbs, and May has done the best job I've seen so far (May has knowledge of Latin that both Gibbs and Lockerby do not) and even May discovered that it's difficult to prove if or what might actually be Latin and that the resulting text is unusually, exceedingly repetitious. May has not only done a better job than other claimants, but is also willing to look critically at the translation and say, "Something doesn't quite add up here."
Here is some of the discussion of the translation:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
We have other Latin scholars in the Voynich community who have not been able to turn the VMS into intelligible, substantiatable Latin, so I'm not sure why researchers with little or no knowledge of Latin think they can do something Latin scholars with a strong interest in the VMS AND good knowledge of scribal abbreviations have so far not done.
I have also repeated many times, both here and on my blog, that Latin characters and abbreviations were used in many languages, not just Latin. To assume that Latin abbreviations and ligatures automatically means the underlying language is Latin also shows a lack of knowledge of medieval scribal conventions.
The first language I (and many other Voynich researchers) tried to extract from the VMS text was Latin. Not only was it the lingua franca of the middle ages, but the glyphs are primarily Latin. It's not a new idea, it's an old one that so far hasn't panned out, but I'd still like to discuss the first few words in the Voynich Manuscript since Lockerby today repeated his assertion that the first words can be read as, "Peractum es con itaque …"
|
|
|
|
| Cryptologic History panel Oct. 19, 2017 |
|
Posted by: -JKP- - 10-10-2017, 04:34 AM - Forum: News
- Replies (44)
|
|
Richard SantaColoma is scheduled for a pre-20th Century cryptology panel at the Symosium on Cryptologic History (Milestones, Memories, and Momentum), Thurs. Oct. 19th at the Kossiakoff Centery, Laurel, Maryland.
|
|
|
|
| Simon Wayman "decoded partial analysis" |
|
Posted by: -JKP- - 08-10-2017, 06:32 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (4)
|
|
I can't remember anyone posting anything about this video on youtube from Apr. 5, 2016, so I thought I would include a link.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
According to the author, Simon Waymon, it is an extension on ideas presented in Bax's video from Feb. 2014, and focuses on an Arabic interpretation.
Here's a transcript snippet from 15:51 that encapsulates the method (which is taken primarily from the "star charts"):
“Here’s another new star name. This is the most common name on chart 3. These are the first three stars [points out star labels]... The three underneath are some other versions of the name on chart 3. The first star name [reads out pronunciations of similar-looking Vwords]...
Let’s look at the spellings. We can see and “al” followed by vowels. There is a consistent variation within the vowels [points out patterns]... which come and go in their position. The “o” disappears from the beginning of number 5. It appears after the “l” in number 2 and 5. This is typical of the variations I’ve been seeing. We’ve just seen “Tia” [proposed star name] with “o”s on some words.
This is a difficult thing to get across to anyone. I’m showing you all these different words. I’m telling you, they are all variations on the same word.
WaymanStars.png (Size: 147.9 KB / Downloads: 174)
There are two ways to prove that this is true...[see video for explanation]. Please bear in mind that I’ve been looking at these star names, which I think are matches, for long enough to see how they vary. This is the most common word on chart 3, so it must be important, but the name isn't obvious... [description of Star 3, Taurus, and “Pleiades” cluster]"...
After an overview of positions on the star charts, Wayman anagrams the letter groups to produce names that are similar to one another and more readable as natural language.
WaymanStarsAnag.png (Size: 181.46 KB / Downloads: 173)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is primarily a substitution + anagrams theory. For example, "o" is translated as "a", EVA-d as "t", gallows-t is ell and a "g" at the end is sometimes ignored and sometimes interpreted as "n", etc. However, when the author of the video notices significant repetition of common letter patterns that don't quite match known star names, these are then anagrammed to produce similar names.
The author does not give explanations as to why these "star names" appear with such great frequency and regularity in other sections that deal with plants, pools, etc.
He proposes that EVA-dar might be TAeR(N) for Taurus and explains the great frequency of "dar" might be because it has more than one meaning.
I thought this video was interesting, because it illustrates a pattern of "discovery" that I have seen in many of the proposed VMS solutions, that of 1) substitution, 2) ignoring certain glyphs that don't quite seem to fit, 3) anagraming (when trying to apply the substitution pattern to larger blocks of text doesn't quite work), and 4) various justifications for why a word should mean one thing in the context of an illustration and something else when it doesn't seem to fit as well with other illustrations or blocks of text (when the system doesn't generalize to other sections).
I'm not trying to present this pattern in a negative light—just reporting something I've noticed. For example, the very fact that so many attempts at decipherment end up with the researcher variously including and ignoring certain glyphs (like EVA-y at the end of tokens) might have some significance (perhaps they are nulls or markers).
So... we have a substitution code based on the assumption that short groups of text next to recognizable illustrations are labels (and probably nouns), which is an extremely common starting point for many VMS theories, followed by a selective process of including or ignoring certain glyphs when they don't seem to fit (also a very common pattern in decipherment attempts), followed by anagraming, which is a prevalent second or third step taken by many researchers once they start to notice the great amount of repetition in the text, followed by an explanation that words of great frequency which have been given an explanation in one part of the manuscript, might have more than one interpretation when they are encountered in another section (or attached to other "syllables").
What differs in Wayman's explanation from a number of other theories is the assertion that similar names are meant to be read as the same. In other words, there might be five or so variant spellings of the same label. If one considers that the VMS is already highly repetitious, if this were true, then the actual content of the manuscript would be dramatically reduced and the entire manuscript would have to be interpreted as being full of star names. Either that, or similar-looking words might have different meanings if they seem out of place.
Unfortunately, these two ideas combined brings one perilously close to a one-way cipher. If different spellings mean the same thing (as suggested for star names), but the same thing means different things (such as common syllables like "dar") then how does one sort out which is which? It becomes subjective interpretation.
|
|
|
|
| New proposed solution |
|
Posted by: ReneZ - 04-10-2017, 06:39 AM - Forum: News
- Replies (4)
|
 |
As I already commented elsewhere, this is an unusually fruitful year for solution attempts.
Here is another one:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: image.jpg?q=f116v-864-246-40-60]](https://voynich.ninja/extractor/image.jpg?q=f116v-864-246-40-60)
