24-01-2025, 04:08 PM
With ideas like this I think it is important to zoom out, or you end up with this effect
![[Image: hose.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/NM6n57G8/hose.jpg)
Something to consider in the "zoom out" section is entropy. I would suggest reading the paper done on the VM regarding this, or watching Koen's videos.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for this idea specifically
"A 3-letter arrangement "abc" gives 3! = 6 permutations where the selection of each permutation would depend on the symbols adjacent to the bench.".
Only "e" and "i" repeat with any regularity. If you were to assign glyphs to morph the abbreviation eventually you would then need to write another thing that starts or ends with the same glyph, creating repeats.
EVA: "ch" will not be found near "i", before or after, so this just leaves "e", which wouldn't leave anything much more functional than just writing ech or che. It could be that there's some other system at play that hides this, but this is usually a road that splits into more and more roads, then you are left with "what is possible, and what is likely?". Without (preferably time period correct) examples of what you end up with people will find it unlikely, even if possible.
Something to consider in the "zoom out" section is entropy. I would suggest reading the paper done on the VM regarding this, or watching Koen's videos.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for this idea specifically
"A 3-letter arrangement "abc" gives 3! = 6 permutations where the selection of each permutation would depend on the symbols adjacent to the bench.".
Only "e" and "i" repeat with any regularity. If you were to assign glyphs to morph the abbreviation eventually you would then need to write another thing that starts or ends with the same glyph, creating repeats.
EVA: "ch" will not be found near "i", before or after, so this just leaves "e", which wouldn't leave anything much more functional than just writing ech or che. It could be that there's some other system at play that hides this, but this is usually a road that splits into more and more roads, then you are left with "what is possible, and what is likely?". Without (preferably time period correct) examples of what you end up with people will find it unlikely, even if possible.