04-05-2017, 04:50 PM
With all due respect to everybody, are we going to go around the block again with this recycled methodology? A theory is proposed - a theory is picked apart - repeat - repeat. But perhaps there is a different approach - a theory is built up through collaboration and collective efforts.
That being said, it is my understanding that the the possibility of the VMs language as a simple substitution of a natural language has been eliminated. So the whole premise of VMs Glyph #1 being equivalent to Letter 'A' is problematic. Specifying the correct interpretation of a VMs Glyph is the problem. And having the large numbers of potential equivalents is hopefully not the answer.
Attempts to interpret individual glyphs have been made. An example has been made of the 4 x 17 symbol sequence of VMs f57V. I found that the fifth symbol in this sequence not only has three different interpretations: medieval numbers, Greek alphabet & Roman numerals (inverted) besides being the letter 'v' inverted. In addition, each of these interpretations is given a positional confirmation for the three different interpretations.
The medieval numbers "4" and "7" are properly spaced
The Greek letters lambda and omicron are properly spaced in a counter-clockwise direction.
The Roman numeral "V" = '5' is properly placed as the fifth glyph in the sequence, although inverted.
The information per se is pretty standard, the systems of information are certainly standard for medieval Europe at the time of VMs parchment production. The question is whether to take such a set of occurrences seriously. We need to build on what the VMs gives us, rather than to impose some preconceived notions.
That being said, it is my understanding that the the possibility of the VMs language as a simple substitution of a natural language has been eliminated. So the whole premise of VMs Glyph #1 being equivalent to Letter 'A' is problematic. Specifying the correct interpretation of a VMs Glyph is the problem. And having the large numbers of potential equivalents is hopefully not the answer.
Attempts to interpret individual glyphs have been made. An example has been made of the 4 x 17 symbol sequence of VMs f57V. I found that the fifth symbol in this sequence not only has three different interpretations: medieval numbers, Greek alphabet & Roman numerals (inverted) besides being the letter 'v' inverted. In addition, each of these interpretations is given a positional confirmation for the three different interpretations.
The medieval numbers "4" and "7" are properly spaced
The Greek letters lambda and omicron are properly spaced in a counter-clockwise direction.
The Roman numeral "V" = '5' is properly placed as the fifth glyph in the sequence, although inverted.
The information per se is pretty standard, the systems of information are certainly standard for medieval Europe at the time of VMs parchment production. The question is whether to take such a set of occurrences seriously. We need to build on what the VMs gives us, rather than to impose some preconceived notions.