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

[radapox]

@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   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?