+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Theories & Solutions (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-58.html)
+--- Thread: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of) (/thread-5323.html)
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of) - Koen G - 03-02-2026
(03-02-2026, 03:01 AM)asteckley Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Unfortunately, Jorge, people do seem to be missing the point of the SDA. Looking forward to your reveal, though.
We are just having some fun with anagrams, since this thread is intriguing but there's not much to go on yet. Patrick and I added our own anagrams of predictions about Stolfi's reveal.
Stolfi, you did put the bar high for yourself by saying it's "not a theory, interpretation, guess, etc, but a fact." So is the anagram necessary because you think someone else might make the same discovery while you are working on it?
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of) - Jorge_Stolfi - 03-02-2026
(03-02-2026, 12:06 AM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.There is not a single R in this anagram, which is a positive sign, at least for me.
So you think it cannot be "sakanobotta"?
All the best, --stolfi
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of) - oshfdk - 03-02-2026
(03-02-2026, 12:10 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So you think it cannot be "sakanobotta"?
I hope it's not. Really, for me to return the massive sakanobotta theories to good standing I think nothing would work short of a written affidavit of the sakanobotters accompanied by a detailed explanation of the sakanobotting techniques used, preferably with some video evidence.
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of) - oshfdk - 03-02-2026
(03-02-2026, 03:01 AM)asteckley Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Unfortunately, Jorge, people do seem to be missing the point of the SDA.
I don't think there is a point, in the modern world, other than entertainment. If the point was to protect the priority of some discovery, a modern hash would work better. An anagram of this length most likely has several possible readings in some languages, discoverable via brute force, which makes it possible for people to dispute the original reading, especially if it's not very specific. On the other hand, if it's specific it should be in principle possible to enumerate all anagrams of these letters (a few hundred millions, I think), run a dictionary attack, get something like a 10**5 plausible results and run them through an LLM to identify those that would make sense in the context of a discovery related to the Voynich MS, effectively breaking the secret.
So, the point is having fun and we are having fun.
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of) - DG97EEB - 03-02-2026
I think we should challenge both the standard theory and the modern forgery theory and introduce a new "future past theory", where it was in fact created by Satoshi Nakamoto with a time machine financed via his huge store of bitcoin...
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of) - Jorge_Stolfi - 03-02-2026
(03-02-2026, 01:51 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.If the point was to protect the priority of some discovery, a modern hash would work better.
But it would not be as fun! And this way is more fitting to this forum...
All the best, --stolfi
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of) - Jorge_Stolfi - 03-02-2026
(03-02-2026, 01:51 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.which makes it possible for people to dispute the original reading, especially if it's not very specific
That is not a problem.
Consider the anagram that Galileo sent to Kepler about the phases of Venus:
- Haec immatura a me iam frustra leguntur o.y.
- ("These are now too young to be read by me in vain").
- Macula rufa in Jove est gyratur mathem.
- ("There is a red spot in Jupiter which rotates mathem[atically]")
- Cynthiae figuras aemulatur mater amorum
- ("The mother of love [Venus] emulates the shapes of Cynthia [the Moon]")
(Bizarrely, it seems that Kepler's found his incorrect solution well before the official discovery of the Great Red Spot on Jupiter...)
All the best, --stolfi
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of) - oshfdk - 03-02-2026
(03-02-2026, 03:00 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.But it would not be as fun! And this way is more fitting to this forum...
As I say, fun it is. My favorite anagrams so far:
NUDE MEN IS ASIA
USES NAME INDIA
IS MADE IN N.E. USA
I bet once (and if) the manuscript is deciphered, we can return to this thread and find an anagram that would properly describe the deciphering.
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of) - oshfdk - 03-02-2026
(03-02-2026, 03:20 PM)Jorge_Stolfi Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(03-02-2026, 01:51 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.which makes it possible for people to dispute the original reading, especially if it's not very specific
That is not a problem.
Consider the anagram that Galileo sent to Kepler about the phases of Venus:
I think this was specific enough, if it was about the crescent of Venus. The problem with "animus ne ideas" is that it's very short, all permutations can be easily enumerated. If the result is specific (say, "JOHNDEESIGNATURE" "JOHNDEESIGNATUREONF57V"), it can be extracted, if it's not very specific (say, "HASASIANFRUITS"), it can be contested as not specific enough and retrofitted post-hoc, after someone else discovers Asian fruits in the MS. Of course, if no-one makes a contesting claim before you show the cards, then there is no difference if there was a protective anagram in the first place.
RE: IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (well, sort of) - Jorge_Stolfi - 03-02-2026
(03-02-2026, 03:37 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.If the result is specific (say, "JOHNDEESIGNATURE" "JOHNDEESIGNATUREONF57V"), it can be extracted, if it's not very specific (say, "HASASIANFRUITS"), it can be contested as not specific enough and retrofitted post-hoc, after someone else discovers Asian fruits in the MS. Of course, if no-one makes a contesting claim before you show the cards, then there is no difference if there was a protective anagram in the first place.
There have been many cases of scientific discoveries stolen bydishonest journal reviewers or collaborators. Two that come to mind are the isolation of the HIV virus and Cold Fusion.
In the latter case, two electrochemists thought that they had achieved deuterium-deuterium nuclear fusion by using electrolysis to push the deuterium atoms into palladium, above their normal maximum density. They left the equipment running one night and in the next morning they found only a hole in the concrete lab benchtop. They rushed out a paper to the prestigious journal Nature. But one of the referees who got the paper -- another electrochemist who had been working with palladium -- told the journal that he had made the same discovery before them, and was just writing it up. (In fact none of the three had, because the "discovery" was a big mistake. But that is not the point.) There ensued a bitter feud between the two groups, that was never satisfactory resolved.
The first group could have prevented that theft by sending to any famous guy an anagram of the phrase "D IN PD IS KABOOM" . Even if the anagram was solvable and had many other solutions, that would have been enough to establish their priority -- because the other group could not produce any evidence that would beat that one.
All the best, --stolfi