| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 1137 online users.
» 1 Member(s) | 1131 Guest(s)
Applebot, Bing, Facebook, Google, Yandex, magnesium
|
|
|
| Suggestions for decomposition of the Voynichese characters |
|
Posted by: Anton - 08-06-2017, 08:36 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (49)
|
 |
This my table has been prepared for the draft of our submission to the European HCC of this year, but since the submission was declined, the stuff is unlikely to be ever released, especially given that it did not have enough time to progress from the draft version.
The table, obviously, is also a raw draft and is posted into the forum for the sake of discussion, reference, and possible further development. It builds upon Cham's CLS and also incorporates ideas from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
Here's how the table is to be interpreted. Each cell shows a combination of two "basic" shapes: the first one taken from the respective row on the left, the second one taken from the respective column on the top. The intersection of a basic shape with itself stands not for a "combination", but rather shows whether this basic shape does occur standalone in the VMS or not. If a combination or a basic shape does not occur in the VMS, the respective intersection cell is grayed out. The order matters. For example, e plus dash yields c, but dash plus e yields h. Some combinations are yet indefinite (as suggested by more than one character in a single cell).
Glyphs.jpg (Size: 61.66 KB / Downloads: 844)
|
|
|
| The origin of the base shapes of the Voynich alphabet |
|
Posted by: Anton - 08-06-2017, 01:08 AM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (26)
|
|
I was thinking about the Voynich alphabet the other day at some interesting angle. Let's say the Voynich alphabet is a constructed alphabet. In other words, it's not taken from any script existing apriori, but rather invented by the guy(s) behind the Voynich. (This may be the case irrespectively of whether it conveys a cipher, an artificial language or even a natural language).
Now, it is often noted that many Voynich symbols resemble medieval Latin abbreviations. However, the abbreviations were quite various, while great part of the Voynich alphabet revolves around the "base shape + modifier (mostly tail modifier, but not exclusively)" scheme, where the two predominant base shapes are e and i, - as also already noted (by Cham and those before him). Let's suppose this is the real principle of construction, and not mere visibilty. That the guy indeed "constructed" characters by combining e and i shapes with modifiers. And, btw, a is e plus i.
Then the question emerges - why these two shapes, in particular? Have they had any special significance anywhere else - whether textually, graphically or semiotically? Where could they have been "borrowed" from, and why?
|
|
|
|
| Another "thing" (77v) |
|
Posted by: Koen G - 07-06-2017, 10:24 AM - Forum: Imagery
- Replies (8)
|
 |
I was going over the nymph objects again and I can't remember if anyone has ever found a parallel for this one:
77v.jpg (Size: 107.38 KB / Downloads: 147)
It's not just the identification of the object itself which is problematic, but also the way it is held and the pose of its nymph.
- At first sight, one would say that she is holding it in her mouth, but if the drawing's accuracy at this scale is to be trusted, this is not the case. the object appears to pass behind her face, against her cheek.
- Her hair appears to have a knot in it where the object crosses it, which raises the strange possibility that it is in fact tied to her hair. Again, this is hard to tell given the size of the drawing.
- Her lips slightly part, as if she's blowing at the object. An important note here may be that in a first pass her face was drawn slim, but then a curved line has been added to her cheek to make it appear puffy. This lends credibility to a "blowing" interpretation. Or whistling?
- Her arms are held in an unnatural, even impossible position. Challenge: find a large mirror, stand in front of it and hold your arms like this. It will only work if you're made of pudding. Their positioning is more appropriate for wings (bird's or angel's).
- The base ends in a weird leg with three "toes".
The nymph appears to be blowing over or into the object, which has been marked with a black spot. This spot looks intentional, it is not just an overly thick line. From the object some kind of lines are connected to the water below, and blue marks have been applied to the lines, possibly also indicating water.
So... Anyone? 
|
|
|
|
| Bench Gallows Writing Order |
|
Posted by: Emma May Smith - 27-05-2017, 06:28 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (27)
|
 |
I've been looking at the characters known as 'bench gallows' for a little while (the characters ckh, cth, cfh, cph) and there is something I cannot settle.
What order are the characters stroke written in?
I did think this was the order: 1) e, 2) ek, 3) eke, 4) ckh. But now I'm not so sure. I think that the writer could have possible written c-h with a long crossbar first, then inserted k to make ckh.
There are ways to test this, but I wonder if anybody has an insight to share. I think it would be very useful to know and may make some interpretations of the character more likely than others.
|
|
|
|
| A vague idea |
|
Posted by: Koen G - 26-05-2017, 08:51 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (3)
|
|
Whenever I think in a broad philosophical way about what the Voynich text could actually be, one idea often lurks in the shadows, but I find it hard to explain, partially because I don't know yet if and how it could work. So -disclaimer- expect some vague, half-baked and unfounded hypothesizing in what follows.
- People before the advent of the printing press had a lot more information in their memories than we do now. This difference has even gotten much bigger in the (mobile) internet age, where we have the answer to every question in a piece of glass we carry around in our pockets. But before, it was perfectly normal for an entertainer to perform, say, the Iliad, over several days, completely by heart. But even common farmers would have beaten the best of us in a contest of memory, just because they were required to develop their mnemonic techniques much more than we are.
- Medieval books were generally written with a very specific audience in mind, sometimes even just one person.
- If the scribe knew what his reader(s) knew by heart, this knowledge could be exploited to obscure the text (for whatever reason).
In many ways, the VM text lacks entropy. A simplified glyph set for one, and a relatively predictable word/sentence structure.
So I wonder... might the Voynich text be somewhat like this image?
xbow.jpg (Size: 35.77 KB / Downloads: 133)
The information density of this image is greatly decreased. I removed all color saturation, and it is built of some large blocks instead of many different small ones. Yet in your mind this is enough to complete the picture. I provide the prompt, and you can perfectly fill in his facial expression, the shape of his bow, the position of his hands and the color of his clothes.
So basically what I'm getting at is the following: is it possible that "Voynichese" is just a prompt? Just enough information for the reader to add what's in his mind already?
Another parallel. Imagine that I wanted you to sing a certain song, but I don't want to write down the text because others are not allowed to read the exact lyrics. But I know you know the lyrics by heart. So in this case, I might just present you with the notes, and this relatively low entropy communication would be enough for you to sing the high-entropy song text.
Now if this is at all possible in some way or another, this also means we will never be able to read the manuscript, because the information was already in people's minds. The manuscript just helps them recall it. That is, unless the information is a text that has been recorded normally in another source.
Don't know if any of this makes any sense 
|
|
|
|
| TED-ED Video |
|
Posted by: -JKP- - 26-05-2017, 05:22 PM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (20)
|
|
I just watched the short video on the VMS created by TED-ED and scripted by Stephen Bax.
The graphics are charming. I enjoyed them, and they'll probably reach a broader audience and generate increased interest in the VMS.
There is, however, a statement in the video that I find questionable, and since this section is for analysis of the text, I thought it might be interesting to discuss it.
Here is the statement:
"Cryptologists say the writing has all the characteristics of a real language."
Is that really true? Is that the general consensus among cryptologists? Is there a general consensus among cryptologists?
I'm not a cryptologist, but my personal feeling is that the text diverges quite significantly from natural language, particularly if the spaces are taken literally. I have never seen any natural language with such a high level of repetition combined with such a high degree of positional rigidity, not only in the word-tokens themselves, but also in the construction of individual lines.
The only way I can see this being natural language (and I still haven't discounted the possibility) is IF the spaces are contrived AND there are nulls AND some of the letter forms that appear similar are possibly intended to be differentiated by details (e.g., the length or direction of tails) OR if it is another kind of system entirely (musical notes, numbers, semaphore, etc., which is then converted back into natural language).
Your thoughts?
Mod edit: The link to the video is You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
|
|
|
|
| Stephen Bax's TED-ED video |
|
Posted by: Koen G - 26-05-2017, 02:10 PM - Forum: News
- Replies (15)
|
|
Stephen Bax just updated his website, announcing that he scripted a Voynich video for TED-ED (not to be confused with TED-talks).
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Direct link to the video on TED-ED's YouTube channel:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
It is basically the standard introduction to the manuscript, and experienced researchers won't learn anything new. I like the TED-ED animators' style though, and the animations they did of some of the pages are really beautiful.
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: untitled-9.jpg]](https://herculeaf.files.wordpress.com/2017/06/untitled-9.jpg)
![[Image: BookCoverImage.jpg?random=0.678479972250783]](https://www.createspace.com/Img/T715/T49/T89/BookCoverImage.jpg?random=0.678479972250783)
