15-04-2017, 08:30 PM
The situation can be boiled down slightly - we don't have to assume an entirely open field when wondering whether the text contains a meaning or not.
For a start, we know the text is not random. It obeys certain You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. Therefore, it follows that a text generation mechanism is in place.
What is the purpose of a text generation mechanism? Either to:
If 1), then the mechanism could be a) natural or b) artificial.
If it's a), then it's a natural or artificial language.
If it's b), then it's a code or cipher.
If it's 2), then a deliberate deception is involved.
Or am I missing an option?
Let us examine 2) first.
If we assume a 15th century origin, then it is plausible to assume the mechanism was in place to make the text superficially plausible, and to avoid frequency analysis of letters (using an invented alphabet would again reinforce this point). Such aims could also unintentionally generate the effects we see with modern analysis - the use of a generating mechanism could incidentally cause the text to obey Zipf's and the other Benson laws; there could be an element of intentional re-use of words in different sections and labels; etc etc etc.
If we return to 1).
For many reasons which have been outlined elsewhere, the idea of a "natural" language can probably be discarded. But the highly non-trivial layout of word structure does suggest an artificial language, albeit that such languages didn't start appearing until the mid 16th century.
If we look at codes or ciphers - well, it's not a simply cipher. The whole thing could be a code book, in which case the meaning has probably been lost. Or we could be looking at some sort of steganography. We'd have to examine this a bit further.
For a start, we know the text is not random. It obeys certain You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. Therefore, it follows that a text generation mechanism is in place.
What is the purpose of a text generation mechanism? Either to:
- encode information
- generate pseudo-meaningful text
If 1), then the mechanism could be a) natural or b) artificial.
If it's a), then it's a natural or artificial language.
If it's b), then it's a code or cipher.
If it's 2), then a deliberate deception is involved.
Or am I missing an option?
Let us examine 2) first.
If we assume a 15th century origin, then it is plausible to assume the mechanism was in place to make the text superficially plausible, and to avoid frequency analysis of letters (using an invented alphabet would again reinforce this point). Such aims could also unintentionally generate the effects we see with modern analysis - the use of a generating mechanism could incidentally cause the text to obey Zipf's and the other Benson laws; there could be an element of intentional re-use of words in different sections and labels; etc etc etc.
If we return to 1).
For many reasons which have been outlined elsewhere, the idea of a "natural" language can probably be discarded. But the highly non-trivial layout of word structure does suggest an artificial language, albeit that such languages didn't start appearing until the mid 16th century.
If we look at codes or ciphers - well, it's not a simply cipher. The whole thing could be a code book, in which case the meaning has probably been lost. Or we could be looking at some sort of steganography. We'd have to examine this a bit further.
![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)