Look at *differences* between words rather than at the words themselves?

Look at *differences* between words rather than at the words themselves? - Printable Version

+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Analysis of the text (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-41.html)
+--- Thread: Look at *differences* between words rather than at the words themselves? (/thread-2905.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

RE: Look at *differences* between words rather than at the words themselves? - Koen G - 28-08-2019

(28-08-2019, 09:28 AM)radapox Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.ba-cez ce caz-dyz-faz-fe ge-hiz gix-gew-giv gew-few-gaw-few-giv-gow fov-fit-fos-dos-dur fyr-gyr-fas-fer-fis fit ges-has-har-haq-jaq-hap hap

Okay, so first we have to wonder whether the VM would separate each syllable or not. Let's take the first sentence of the VM:
fachys ykal ar ataiin shol shory cthres y kor sholdy

In this transcription (ZL_2), letter counts are:
6 4 2 6 4 5 6 1 3 6
So everything from 1 to 6. This means that either each source text letter has a 1-6 letter output, or not all output is separated by spaces.
Without separation, your output would be:

bacez ce cazdyzfazfe gehiz gixgewgiv gewfewgawfewgivgow fovfitfosdosdur fyrgyrfasferfis fit geshasharhaqjaqhap hap

That's TTR 100%, which would continue in larger sequences because of the progressive and variable nature of the encoding. I also suspect that even doing some kind of reset at every line would result in a similar variation.

I also suspect that even with practice, it would be a pain to read. But that's the case with every advanced code.

I do understand why you're thinking along these lines though, it's definitely an interesting exercise.

RE: Look at *differences* between words rather than at the words themselves? - radapox - 28-08-2019

(28-08-2019, 09:34 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Yikes, two hours.

Says more about my Excel skills than anything else. Wink

As said, doing the actual enciphering was a fairly quick process.

(28-08-2019, 09:34 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Now... a classical Latin version of The Hobbit?

Be my guest!
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

RE: Look at *differences* between words rather than at the words themselves? - radapox - 28-08-2019

(28-08-2019, 09:57 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I do understand why you're thinking along these lines though, it's definitely an interesting exercise.

Thanks! Yup, it's nothing more than that, and it might be just one of the myriad principles at play... or not at all.

RE: Look at *differences* between words rather than at the words themselves? - Davidsch - 28-08-2019

@radapox

The reason I did not immediately run this differential test on the VMS text, because you can do that in 30 minutes in Excel,
is that I already did the exact same thing a couple of years back.

It was not the exact same test, because I did not took the differentials on sequential letters, but rather looked at the global text as it was a black box. (easiest to explain like this) Then all options considering the gallows (PTKF) were taken and I compared it to the black box of all other known languages (and more). If the result would have been that it represented a language, I would have seen that. Also if the resulting text would have been hussled like an anagram or such.

What I am saying, rada pox leben (grapje), is that you also need at least 1 extra ingredient to succeed. That is the reason, I like this out-of-the-box-thinking.

RE: Look at *differences* between words rather than at the words themselves? - radapox - 28-08-2019

(28-08-2019, 02:06 PM)Davidsch Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.@radapox

The reason I did not immediately run this differential test on the VMS text, because you can do that in 30 minutes in Excel,
is that I already did the exact same thing a couple of years back.

It was not the exact same test, because I did not took the differentials on sequential letters, but rather looked at the global text as it was a black box. (easiest to explain like this) Then all options considering the gallows (PTKF) were taken and I compared it to the black box of all other known languages (and more). If the result would have been that it represented a language, I would have seen that. Also if the resulting text would have been hussled like an anagram or such.

What I am saying, rada pox leben (grapje), is that you also need at least 1 extra ingredient to succeed. That is the reason, I like this out-of-the-box-thinking.

Thanks for your reply! Wow, that is some next-level work you've been doing there. I'd love to have a look at it sometime, even if it shows that my suggestion was way off the mark. Since your subscription explicitly asks for it though Wink

here are a few questions regarding your message:

My approach (the letter-to-syllable version described in my You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.) also doesn't look at sequential letters but at syllables, and perhaps something similar could be done on (multi-syllable) word level. Do you expect this to make any difference?
Rada pox leben? Not fully sure if I'm getting that grapje.
What extra ingredient are you hinting at?

RE: Look at *differences* between words rather than at the words themselves? - Linda - 28-08-2019

(28-08-2019, 02:34 PM)radapox Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Rada pox leben? Not fully sure if I'm getting that grapje.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. has writing some consider to read as pox leben, your username is radapox...smoosh Smile

RE: Look at *differences* between words rather than at the words themselves? - radapox - 28-08-2019

(28-08-2019, 06:51 PM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.F116v has writing some consider to read as pox leben, your username is radapox...smoosh

I seeeeee. Smile

Haha, I didn't know that.

EDIT: Yay, look at my new Avatar!

RE: Look at *differences* between words rather than at the words themselves? - davidjackson - 28-08-2019

(28-08-2019, 09:57 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.fachys ykal ar ataiin shol shory cthres y kor sholdy

I would suggest that your attempt at counting depends very much upon the original glyph set:
fachys ykal ar ataiin shol shory cthres y kor sholdy
is ch one glyph or two? What about iin? Etc.

RE: Look at *differences* between words rather than at the words themselves? - Koen G - 28-08-2019

(28-08-2019, 09:06 PM)davidjackson Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I would suggest that your attempt at counting depends very much upon the original glyph set:
fachys ykal ar ataiin shol shory cthres y kor sholdy
is ch one glyph or two? What about iin? Etc.

Of course! EVA has been designed to be stroke-based, so it will dwell at the high end of the spectrum. Still the point remains that there is more variation in word length. The difference between "y" and "sholdy" is obvious even when "sh" is considered one glyph.

RE: Look at *differences* between words rather than at the words themselves? - Davidsch - 29-08-2019

@radapox: I think it seems I used the wrong thread for my posting, sorry, I will send you a private message