22-10-2019, 06:23 AM
Taking Jürgen Hermes' comment from another thread:
Indeed, it has not made the press, but I think that this may be a 'good thing'. Perhaps it was a bit too complicated for that type of publication, or it didn't have the spectacular element that the modern press likes.
As for the second point, there is no working solution for any aspect of the Voynich MS text, so I think one can only analyse all proposed solutions by themselves and see if they 'work'.
My question remains what the autocopist theory really explains. It focusses on one aspect (similar words appearing near each other) but does not explain some more conspicuous ones, even if in the most recent paper it argues that it does.
Earlier in this thread it was already shown that it is quite possible to encode a meaningful text in such a way that similar words appear near each other.
I need to do a bit more reading before I go further.
Quote:I didn't write that (but I apologize if I expressed it misleadingly). What I wrote was that A) I'm still surprised that the autocopist theory has received relatively little attention (with Cheshire / Gibbs etc. in mind). Also I wrote that B) I still cannot find any real arguments in the relevant forums to suggest that an alternative theory would be preferable to that of the autocopist. Witch doesn't mean it wasn't discussed. But I'm glad I gave you an impulse to re-read the papers ;-)
Indeed, it has not made the press, but I think that this may be a 'good thing'. Perhaps it was a bit too complicated for that type of publication, or it didn't have the spectacular element that the modern press likes.
As for the second point, there is no working solution for any aspect of the Voynich MS text, so I think one can only analyse all proposed solutions by themselves and see if they 'work'.
My question remains what the autocopist theory really explains. It focusses on one aspect (similar words appearing near each other) but does not explain some more conspicuous ones, even if in the most recent paper it argues that it does.
Earlier in this thread it was already shown that it is quite possible to encode a meaningful text in such a way that similar words appear near each other.
I need to do a bit more reading before I go further.