25-09-2023, 08:05 AM
While pfeaster and others pursue their good research ideas, maybe it could be a good idea to ponder also the basics.
I have had these questions in my mind for a long time but alas I have no skills nor capabilities to find answers to them.
1. Why the MS creators chose to have 24 glyphs and not more or less? Even numbers are always a bit suspicious.
Is is because the underlying language had the same amout of letters? Classical latin has 23 letters, Greek had 24.
Did the creator somehow estimate or calculate how many glyphs, characters were needed to be able to form all words, labels etc.?
Or did the encoding method require exactly that many, like grilles or wheels...
2. Hapax legomenon?
What kind of writing or encoding process/model/method would produce create 6014 singular (=hapax legomenon) words in a book of 37104 words.
Just a casual gibberish writing couldn't do it, so what would be the characteristics and properties of a writing/production model that would yield so many singular (=hapax legomena) words.
The common properties for producing more singular words are text length and topic, intended audience and production duration.
But the creation of VMS must have used some quite unique method to be able to create 8466 unique words and 6014 singular words. I am not sure if Torsten's autocopy would produce such results without some other process or method behind it.
There is also a possibiity that not all of the 6014 really are singulars, maybe because of different forms of the same word.
How could we envision this process or method? Is it a (by)result of the the used encoding process or something else? Just a byproduct of transliteration?
3. Cryptology?
What makes VMS so special that the decent cryptanalysis methods do not crack it. Cryptos (1-3) and Zodiac were cracked. Enigma and friends too.
They were invented in period of much more understanding of the matters. In 14th and 15th century it was harder to imagine encryption.
What are constraints, characteristics and properties of the VMS that makes it resistant modern cryptanalysis? Is it because it isn't really encrypted at all?
Why not even statistical nor linguistic analysis do not seem to produce strong results? Because it is not text but symbols?
4. Positionality?
This is a bit similar to hapax legomenon. There are some well-known beginning-end combinations, 4o-89. Gallows at the beginnings.
The thing is. Why. It was intended and maybe this kind of rigidity made the production easier. Gallows at the beginning are indicators how to read the blocks, and as the encoding method is such, to understand the text, begin-end markers were required.
But there are too many of these rigidities. Is there any exmple the creator could have seen to get this idea of positionality? Any known language or known text that had these kinds of ideas? It is hard to invent all alone.
What constraints and properties that kind of method would have?
There must be method in the madness as it produced something durable. A method that was flexible enough to allow four persons independently contribute in it and still rigid enough to allow constrained evolution (Currer A->B)-
Could the VMS be a idle passtime work of some prince of Florence? Aristocrats and royals surely had time, money and access to information.
To invent a sufficient number of glyphs to support the text, create a design to each glyph, define a method to produce encoded/encrypted information.
And of course, create the information to write in the book in the first place. Maybe by defining and understanding the constrains, properties, requirements and methods that were needed to produce VMS we could use then get better understanding of the good work of statistics, text analysis and grammar and others .
I am quite sure all of this has been thought before, as most of the things ind the VMS research but still, maybe someone gets some ideas or a-ha moments from it.
I have had these questions in my mind for a long time but alas I have no skills nor capabilities to find answers to them.
1. Why the MS creators chose to have 24 glyphs and not more or less? Even numbers are always a bit suspicious.
Is is because the underlying language had the same amout of letters? Classical latin has 23 letters, Greek had 24.
Did the creator somehow estimate or calculate how many glyphs, characters were needed to be able to form all words, labels etc.?
Or did the encoding method require exactly that many, like grilles or wheels...
2. Hapax legomenon?
What kind of writing or encoding process/model/method would produce create 6014 singular (=hapax legomenon) words in a book of 37104 words.
Just a casual gibberish writing couldn't do it, so what would be the characteristics and properties of a writing/production model that would yield so many singular (=hapax legomena) words.
The common properties for producing more singular words are text length and topic, intended audience and production duration.
But the creation of VMS must have used some quite unique method to be able to create 8466 unique words and 6014 singular words. I am not sure if Torsten's autocopy would produce such results without some other process or method behind it.
There is also a possibiity that not all of the 6014 really are singulars, maybe because of different forms of the same word.
How could we envision this process or method? Is it a (by)result of the the used encoding process or something else? Just a byproduct of transliteration?
3. Cryptology?
What makes VMS so special that the decent cryptanalysis methods do not crack it. Cryptos (1-3) and Zodiac were cracked. Enigma and friends too.
They were invented in period of much more understanding of the matters. In 14th and 15th century it was harder to imagine encryption.
What are constraints, characteristics and properties of the VMS that makes it resistant modern cryptanalysis? Is it because it isn't really encrypted at all?
Why not even statistical nor linguistic analysis do not seem to produce strong results? Because it is not text but symbols?
4. Positionality?
This is a bit similar to hapax legomenon. There are some well-known beginning-end combinations, 4o-89. Gallows at the beginnings.
The thing is. Why. It was intended and maybe this kind of rigidity made the production easier. Gallows at the beginning are indicators how to read the blocks, and as the encoding method is such, to understand the text, begin-end markers were required.
But there are too many of these rigidities. Is there any exmple the creator could have seen to get this idea of positionality? Any known language or known text that had these kinds of ideas? It is hard to invent all alone.
What constraints and properties that kind of method would have?
There must be method in the madness as it produced something durable. A method that was flexible enough to allow four persons independently contribute in it and still rigid enough to allow constrained evolution (Currer A->B)-
Could the VMS be a idle passtime work of some prince of Florence? Aristocrats and royals surely had time, money and access to information.
To invent a sufficient number of glyphs to support the text, create a design to each glyph, define a method to produce encoded/encrypted information.
And of course, create the information to write in the book in the first place. Maybe by defining and understanding the constrains, properties, requirements and methods that were needed to produce VMS we could use then get better understanding of the good work of statistics, text analysis and grammar and others .
I am quite sure all of this has been thought before, as most of the things ind the VMS research but still, maybe someone gets some ideas or a-ha moments from it.