My thoughts on the VMS

[-JKP-]

Hey all, I've been trying to see if I could prove that spaces (as written) in the VMS are fake. I found some things which may indicate patterns across words, but I submit the images for your review:

<otchordy> split two different ways on the same page?


<otchordy> and <opchordy> in the text as 1, 2, or 3 words:

And then there is this beauty, where <kydaiin> repeats, but the combinations of <ch-ky> and <sh-ky> are also interesting:



Hope this might catch your interest!

I've also been looking at the spaces, because it can potentially answer many questions.

For example, I asked,

• if spaces have been added (or removed), does that mean "unique" words are not necessarily unique?
  
• if spaces have been removed, does that mean the gallows characters might be pilcrows/capitula?
  
• if spaces have been added, does that mean the labels map more widely to the main text than currently appears?
  
• if spaces have been added/removed, do the changes in units that appear to behave like prefixes/suffixes have a different function?
  

I had looked at the EVA font and didn't agree with some aspects, so I created my own. Then I glanced at the first three pages of the Takahashi transcription (this was years ago so I don't know if I remember the name correctly), didn't agree with that either and created my own transcription of the entire manuscript. I also created a desktop-publishing version of the VMS font that looks like Voynich glyphs but is easier to read than regular Voynichese.

Then I analyzed the text and broke it into its component parts.

Some time ago, I created a list of what I believe to be atomic units (root words, prefixes, suffixes and those which may be markers/modifiers).

• I created a color-coded concordance of every vord in the manuscript (this took months of dedicated effort and was only the beginning).
  
• I located the unique words, broke them into units and followed those units to see whether the components were found elsewhere with spaces. I also organized them so I could see if unique-word units were manipulated in some consistent way and whether their position relative to illustrations and other words changed significantly when they were deconstructed. In part, I was trying to determine whether spaces could be believed and, if not, whether they were arbitrary or contrived.
  
•  I then started working on word pairs and word triples to see if they behaved in the same way or yielded different patterns. This is a massive task but is necessary if the spaces are not always real.
  

Before you ask me to post examples, note that this is a huge project. I have over 2,000 pages of notes describing what happens and I haven't even noted it all down yet or "pretty formatted" all the charts. Making lists of word-token patterns based on respecting the spaces (a worthwhile examination in its own right) is trivial compared to describing what happens when spaces are added and subtracted. It's also trivial compared to extrapolating the meaning of the patterns.

Most of my notes are based on describing the significance of the patterns rather than listing them (both together would be thousands of pages longer). The lists can be generated algorithmically, so I've left that on my "to do" list. As for significance, I think I have a fairly good idea of what some of the dense-text pages (the ones without illustrations) are about. I also think I know how the starred text pages relate to the rest. I am still somewhat unsure about the "pool" pages but I have some suspicions (too much to do, not enough time). In general, I am able to recognize some of the VMS vord groups and predict where they will show up and approximately how often. Even this took months to achieve.

But, to give a few examples that illustrate the scope of this line of research, consider these (and note that these are ONLY examples, there's no way to summarize 2,000+ pages of notes on a forum post or even in a paper without over-simplifying it):

• oPnccol appears as unique to the star section, but appears as nccol in a number of specific places. Similarly, Hñcoßal is unique to a plant page but ñcoßal and also ñco ßal are found elsewhere (sorry, I don't use EVA, I have my own system). Note that both are preceded by gallows characters. HñoIcoßg and Pncoßng also behave this way. They are at the beginning of paragraphs, and are unique words until you remove the gallows character. This adds data to the question of whether gallows might be pilcrows/capitula.
  
• Most unique words break down into two components that can function independently, but some break into three. Breaking them into two components does not mean those components are frequent (as one might expect if they were linguistic syllables).
  
• When a unique word does not break into atomic units that function independently, most of the time it's because a single character has been added at the end. Remove this and they usually map to another section. One has to ask if it's a null (or a modifier such as we might add "-s" to create plurals).
  
• When a unique vord is short, adding a prefix or suffix will usually relate it to vords elsewhere.
  
• Vords like PoxaRaR, which is always at the beginnings of paragraphs, break down into 1) a unit that is usually at the beginning of paragraphs and 2) one that has a limited distribution in related sections.
  
• Vords beginning with 4o tend to cluster in two specific kinds of pages.
  
• Vords that behave as suffixes will frequently appear after many of the same units with a space in between. In other words, if you have something like abcdefg and "fg" is a frequent suffix, then it's also common to find abcde fg with a space in between. This suggests that some spaces may be contrived but even if they are, it doesn't mean all units necessarily behave this way.
  
• Just as there's a high level of clustering of 4o words in certain sections, there is a strong clustering of oH words in the zodiac pages and where they lead depends on what follows the prefix. This, combined with similar examples, demonstrates that the text is not random and is not created with a grille to make it look less random. It is systematic and when you get to know the system well enough, you can predict where to find certain vords.
  
• The length of a vord does not always predict its frequency. You might think longer words would be less frequent, short words might be moreso (as in natural-language patterns of "a" "in" "of" "the" "is", etc.) but some short words are quite infrequent and there's a certain group of long words that are fairly frequent.
  
• The distribution of some of the vords suggests that some of the drawings might not be what they seem at first glance. They also suggest that there are connections between separate sections that make the entire manuscript a somewhat cohesive effort (rather than a bunch of separate pamphlets on different topics strung together). I haven't had time to check if all the sections behave this way, but I've checked many of them.
  
• Even though there is strong evidence of digraphs, many of the prefixes and suffixes are single characters.
  

Here is another observation that argues against random or grille-generated text:

There are two kinds of "unique" words:

• those that can only be found in one place (and which can usually be broken into independent units as noted above, which means they may not be unique), and
  
• those that map a page to the starred text (to one or multiple starred pages) and nowhere else. One way to interpret this is that the starred text may be summary information that ties together the preceding pages. I mean "summary" in the broad sense. If the plants were medicinal (for example) and the starred text were prescriptions, one would expect this kind of dynamic but there are other possibilities, as well.
  

A large number of plant pages have vords that map only to the starred text. When they do, there are usually one to three of these vords and they are usually spaced out (not adjacent). The zodiac pages have them with similar frequency but the small-plant pages have noticeably fewer in proportion to the amount of text.


Thomas, this is a significantly condensed version because there's no way to explain any of this with so few words and I had hoped to write up the long version , with charts, arrows, balloons, and everything else that's required to explain it properly (along with some of my ideas of what some of the vords mean), but there's a lot of interest in this now so there you go. I can't sit on it forever.