Indeed.
My experiments are also character based. I have a second iteration, below. The source text is, as before, from Dante. The method does not generate any of the following characters:
g m f k b
They are all considered to be variants of other characters to be used in special cases. (I consider the same to be true for n by the way.)
Anyway, here goes:
ol ar dar dchear sey dqokol sol okShar Sheol cKhol dotokaiin ol
otaiin doty okaiin oteol y dsol chear ddar aiin cKhey choteain dotar
Sheey chaiin cKhy okaiin Shy cKhol aiin aiin seseaiin dsar daiin ol
Sheaiin otear ol Sheeol cTheain ol aiin choteol y sain dShar chchy cThol ain dotar
chaiin sar cKhy qoty okSheol daiin cKhaiin cKhey chchaiin cKhaiin chchy
Sheey Sheaiin cKhy aiin sol oteaiin ain okaiin ol chShar okShar Sheoteain dotar
I chose Italian for a particular reason, but it creates a problem from the fact that it has numerous doublets, or at least the Dante text has. Therefore, there are quite a few unusual cases of chch and dd , both of which can occur, but only quite rarely.
The most interesting part (for me) is that the inverse method, i.e. the one that brings back the original Dante from the above, is capable of converting 96% of genuine Voynich MS text.
The best part is that the entropy of this converted text is almost 'normal' (not quite).
Unfortunately, it does not convert it into readable Italian, but into meaningless strings.
This was also not expected, because I have not taken into account a lot of important things, mainly the unusual line-start behaviour.
There is also no explanation for the variation between Currier languages, and with this type of method, the biological text is almost inevitably nonsensical.
My experiments are also character based. I have a second iteration, below. The source text is, as before, from Dante. The method does not generate any of the following characters:
g m f k b
They are all considered to be variants of other characters to be used in special cases. (I consider the same to be true for n by the way.)
Anyway, here goes:
Quote:ol ar dar dchear sey dqokol sol okshar sheol ckhol dotokaiin ol
otaiin doty okaiin oteol y dsol chear ddar aiin ckhey choteain dotar
sheey chaiin ckhy okaiin shy ckhol aiin aiin seseaiin dsar daiin ol
sheaiin otear ol sheeol ctheain ol aiin choteol y sain dshar chchy cthol ain dotar
chaiin sar ckhy qoty oksheol daiin ckhaiin ckhey chchaiin ckhaiin chchy
sheey sheaiin ckhy aiin sol oteaiin ain okaiin ol chshar okshar sheoteain dotar
ol ar dar dchear sey dqokol sol okShar Sheol cKhol dotokaiin ol
otaiin doty okaiin oteol y dsol chear ddar aiin cKhey choteain dotar
Sheey chaiin cKhy okaiin Shy cKhol aiin aiin seseaiin dsar daiin ol
Sheaiin otear ol Sheeol cTheain ol aiin choteol y sain dShar chchy cThol ain dotar
chaiin sar cKhy qoty okSheol daiin cKhaiin cKhey chchaiin cKhaiin chchy
Sheey Sheaiin cKhy aiin sol oteaiin ain okaiin ol chShar okShar Sheoteain dotar
I chose Italian for a particular reason, but it creates a problem from the fact that it has numerous doublets, or at least the Dante text has. Therefore, there are quite a few unusual cases of chch and dd , both of which can occur, but only quite rarely.
The most interesting part (for me) is that the inverse method, i.e. the one that brings back the original Dante from the above, is capable of converting 96% of genuine Voynich MS text.
The best part is that the entropy of this converted text is almost 'normal' (not quite).
Unfortunately, it does not convert it into readable Italian, but into meaningless strings.
This was also not expected, because I have not taken into account a lot of important things, mainly the unusual line-start behaviour.
There is also no explanation for the variation between Currier languages, and with this type of method, the biological text is almost inevitably nonsensical.