| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Latest Threads |
f17r multispectral images
Forum: Marginalia
Last Post: Bernd
20 minutes ago
» Replies: 116
» Views: 44,450
|
About the generation of s...
Forum: Analysis of the text
Last Post: nablator
58 minutes ago
» Replies: 5
» Views: 175
|
Rauwolf & Clusius & Gessn...
Forum: Provenance & history
Last Post: ReneZ
1 hour ago
» Replies: 1
» Views: 65
|
My pet theory
Forum: Theories & Solutions
Last Post: JoJo_Jost
3 hours ago
» Replies: 6
» Views: 253
|
Voynich Zoom CFP
Forum: News
Last Post: asteckley
8 hours ago
» Replies: 45
» Views: 3,792
|
Repetition of words
Forum: Voynich Talk
Last Post: ReneZ
10 hours ago
» Replies: 68
» Views: 11,788
|
Huth's reading of f116v: ...
Forum: Marginalia
Last Post: JoJo_Jost
Yesterday, 07:00 PM
» Replies: 22
» Views: 505
|
Voynich is encrypted ENOC...
Forum: Theories & Solutions
Last Post: Radim Dobeš
Yesterday, 04:16 PM
» Replies: 64
» Views: 4,644
|
Thomas Ernst Handwriting ...
Forum: News
Last Post: BessAgritianin
Yesterday, 03:37 PM
» Replies: 13
» Views: 1,093
|
The Book Switch Theory
Forum: Theories & Solutions
Last Post: Jorge_Stolfi
Yesterday, 01:28 PM
» Replies: 137
» Views: 7,188
|
|
|
| Grammatical Gender |
|
Posted by: Dobri - 04-04-2025, 08:12 AM - Forum: Analysis of the text
- Replies (27)
|
 |
It came to my mind that even if the vords in the cypher manuscript would be hard to decode,
perhaps a combinatorial analysis of prospective grammatical gender would give a limited number of comparative grammatical gender tables for further analysis.
For example it is tempting to think of the text as Greek-like because of the common prefix 'o' (nominative masculine definitive article) but this is also equally deceptive if 'o' is something else entirely.
Therefore, I would like to invite the Voynich Ninja members to share in this thread their thoughts on the grammatical gender system of the cypher manuscript.
|
|
|
| Special Rules |
|
Posted by: Koen G - 01-04-2025, 05:04 PM - Forum: Curated threads
- Replies (1)
|
 |
The You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. promote general good behavior on the forum (no flaming, no spamming...). However, over the years the need has arisen to introduce some specific additional rules. These rules seek to maintain the balance between freedom of expression for all and a positive user experience.
1. You are welcome to discuss your theory, but keep it in a single thread.
Why is this rule necessary? Some people are enthusiastic about their theories or solutions, and they want to share them in as many places as possible. So they will make a bunch of new threads, or derail existing discussions. Therefore, all theories, translations... should be discussed in their own threads.
2. Clearly mention if (part of) your post was AI-generated.
We are seeing a rise of AI applications, or at least services marketed as such. These can be a great tool in your research, but they also pose challenges. The use of various kinds of AI is permitted on the forum, under the condition that AI-generated content is flagged as such.
Update: experience has shown that Voynich-related research tends to become polluted with hallucinations and slop as soon as a person interacts with a chatbot. We now have a zero-tolerance policy.
Not a rule, but some advice on the use of AI: - LLM's like ChatGPT are trained on vast amounts of data scraped off the internet. They use this data to predict a word in a sentence, and then the next word and the next. You can think of the LLM as taking an average of what the internet says about a subject and then generating a human-like text response to your question. It has no consciousness and does not reason - it just generates human language. The data it has on a niche subject like the VM is limited, and often conflicting or of questionable quality. So will be its answers.
- ChatGPT is easy to manipulate. It took me only one question to make it explain why (very serious) Voynich researcher Rene Zandbergen believes the MS was made by aliens (he doesn't). It will happily confirm a bad Voynich theory because, once again, it doesn't think.
- Even about "regular" subjects, LLM's often hallucinate, make stuff op.
- ChatGPT is especially bad at solving ciphers, and it will feed you fake solutions with great confidence.
Therefore, it is always a good idea to confirm what chatbots tell you before sharing it with others. Either by finding the information in a separate source, or by testing a solution yourself. We understand that not everyone is able to do this, and it doesn't apply to all situations, so this is a suggestion rather than a rule.
|
|
|
|
Fresh Approaches to Deciphering the Voynich Manuscript – Open for Collaboration |
|
Posted by: njlopespawn - 31-03-2025, 08:12 PM - Forum: The Slop Bucket
- Replies (3)
|
|
Hello Voynich Enthusiasts,
I've been captivated by the mystery of the Voynich Manuscript and wanted to share some unconventional ideas that might inspire new perspectives. Here's a summary of my thoughts and approaches:
1. **Reverse Text Analysis**: By analyzing the manuscript backwards—reading from the end to the beginning—hidden patterns or alternative sequences might emerge. This could involve reversing sentences, words, or even sections.
2. **Correlating Text with Illustrations**: A focused investigation into patterns or keywords related to the manuscript's illustrations could provide context. Linking the text to visual elements (e.g., plants or celestial diagrams) might clarify its meaning.
3. **Space-Filling Hypothesis**: The manuscript may deliberately avoid "empty spaces," densely filling every possible area with text. This unique structure could mask hidden messages and challenge traditional text layouts.
4. **Exploring Overlapping Layers**: Advanced imaging techniques, such as ultraviolet or infrared scans, could reveal hidden layers beneath the visible text or illustrations. These layers might contain crucial clues.
5. **Digital Simulation of Text Layout**: A digital model of the manuscript could simulate alternative reading sequences—such as reverse, vertical, diagonal, or even nonlinear paths. This simulation might uncover new insights.
I believe fresh perspectives and collaboration are key to unraveling this enigmatic manuscript. If anyone has tried similar methods or would like to explore these ideas further, I’d love to hear your thoughts and insights!
Best regards,
Néstor
|
|
|
|
| My thoughts after discovering Voynich 10 years ago |
|
Posted by: sunflowerleaf - 30-03-2025, 02:25 AM - Forum: Voynich Talk
- Replies (1)
|
|
Hello, I am a person who found out about the voynich manuscript 10 years ago, and although I haven't been actively trying to solve it since then, it has been a mystery that stuck at the back of my mind. And I would like to share my thoughts that I have concluded after this time of being familiar with the manuscript. Feel free to argue/criticize my claims.
I feel almost certain that the voynich manuscript is a medical manuscript. The reason why I came to this conclusion is because the parts of the manuscript fits excellent with the parts that would be included in a medical manuscript of it's time, while any other kind of manuscript doesn't make as much sense, so by using the exclusion method, I believe a medical manuscript is the most logical solution.
The parts in questions are what I consider to be the herbal sections, cosmological section, astrological section, mappa mundi, and anatomical section with the humours. To me, it also makes the most logical sense why someone in the 1400s would encode a medical manuscript, due to taboos of the time as well as protecting secrets.
I believe that not only the text is concealed, but also the images, and that's why they look so weird. While I think it makes sense to look for geographical influences in the images, I think people are making a mistake when they try to interpret the images literally, because clearly they aren't depicted directly. It makes sense to me that they are drawn oddly, because if they weren't, the medical secrets and potential taboos that the text wants to keep hidden, could be revealed by the images, and the person who created the manuscript clearly wanted to keep the content hidden.
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: p0l0z4b6.jpg.webp]](https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/images/ic/1024xn/p0l0z4b6.jpg.webp)