25-07-2016, 01:10 PM
@Psillycyber: Yes, of course !
I examined the distance of words some time ago. Not only the standard vord-distance. Also many combinations. Such as: removal of any of the letters, gallows are the vord-distance and not spaces, o is the vord distance etc. etc. However, none of those is a real distance compared with the existing languages, i concluded the existing spaces in the text are in fact real word spaces. Publication of these huge lists consumes too much time and does not add value in my opinion.
The distance of words and the distance of short-long-long etc (stats based on common 3 words-distances particular for a language) could be examined, but there are fancier techniques for that, based on word-vectors which is a subject in linguistic studies. I know it is useless to try that because many universities use the vms-text as study material. (see my links in the docs-library section). If there was any discovery based on that, we would have heard about it a long time ago.
At first sight the copy or repeating sequences of TT are interesting because we all know there seems to be a repeating pattern in the ngrams and the vords. However if you examen this objectively, you can see that many text is repetitive: if you write a book about God and use He and The Holy One as reference, you can be sure that these words are in the TOP 10 always: The God He Holy One.
If you would stick these words to other words, let's say: then here thems gods goddess he's her hers holymoly holyness once ones onetime
You can be sure that you will be dazzled with the many "resembling" words. And that is what is going on in the VMS exactly. Take any text and you will find the same things. The big challenge lies (working on it now a couple of hours each week!) in recognizing the conjugation, the language en the abbreviations/ligatures used.
Among the researchers there seem to be three types:
a) the easy walker: he is looking at the text much too easy, as if the text can be deciphered easily and requires no textual knowledge, no historical research but could be read if he is in the mode, the right "trance" and if he has "some luck".
b) the hard persistent worker, that examines everything, read all, draws almost no conclusion, is able to change his opinion quickly, adapts new insights.
c) the beta-man that approaches the text as a mathematical problem that could be solved with the right formula, often high educated.
I write all this, because i think the approach we need does not depend on 1 theory and 1 method. The solution lies in a combination of natural language and a simple pattern + another simple pattern + another simple pattern. So i think TT is good on the way, like many researchers, but he gave up too soon and made the decision that it was time to draw up the formula.
I examined the distance of words some time ago. Not only the standard vord-distance. Also many combinations. Such as: removal of any of the letters, gallows are the vord-distance and not spaces, o is the vord distance etc. etc. However, none of those is a real distance compared with the existing languages, i concluded the existing spaces in the text are in fact real word spaces. Publication of these huge lists consumes too much time and does not add value in my opinion.
The distance of words and the distance of short-long-long etc (stats based on common 3 words-distances particular for a language) could be examined, but there are fancier techniques for that, based on word-vectors which is a subject in linguistic studies. I know it is useless to try that because many universities use the vms-text as study material. (see my links in the docs-library section). If there was any discovery based on that, we would have heard about it a long time ago.
At first sight the copy or repeating sequences of TT are interesting because we all know there seems to be a repeating pattern in the ngrams and the vords. However if you examen this objectively, you can see that many text is repetitive: if you write a book about God and use He and The Holy One as reference, you can be sure that these words are in the TOP 10 always: The God He Holy One.
If you would stick these words to other words, let's say: then here thems gods goddess he's her hers holymoly holyness once ones onetime
You can be sure that you will be dazzled with the many "resembling" words. And that is what is going on in the VMS exactly. Take any text and you will find the same things. The big challenge lies (working on it now a couple of hours each week!) in recognizing the conjugation, the language en the abbreviations/ligatures used.
Among the researchers there seem to be three types:
a) the easy walker: he is looking at the text much too easy, as if the text can be deciphered easily and requires no textual knowledge, no historical research but could be read if he is in the mode, the right "trance" and if he has "some luck".
b) the hard persistent worker, that examines everything, read all, draws almost no conclusion, is able to change his opinion quickly, adapts new insights.
c) the beta-man that approaches the text as a mathematical problem that could be solved with the right formula, often high educated.
I write all this, because i think the approach we need does not depend on 1 theory and 1 method. The solution lies in a combination of natural language and a simple pattern + another simple pattern + another simple pattern. So i think TT is good on the way, like many researchers, but he gave up too soon and made the decision that it was time to draw up the formula.