How could you prove that VM is gibberish?

[Jorge_Stolfi]

But if someone wanted to prove that VM is nonsensical, how would the definitive proof look like? Is it possible at all?

It would be possible if we can find is a simple deterministic algorithm that generates the whole text, either without any other input, or with a known input (like the Bible) that cannot carry any new message.  Then the only "meaning" of the text would be that algorithm and the choice of that auxiliary input.

If the algorithm is not deterministic, the sequence of bits that specifies the "random" choices made when generating the VMS would constitute non-trivial contents -- and those bits then could have any meaningful message in some unknown encoding.   Ditto if the algorithm is deterministic but requires more than a few bits of input data.  Like, if for each line of the VMS one must specify a verse of the Bible to be used as input to the algorithm.  Then the sequence of verse numbers could be a meaningful message in some code.

The T&T "self-copy and mutate" algorithm, for example, requires an input stream of bits to decide when+how to reset the copy-from pointer and whether+how to mutate each copied word.  Thus, even if we could prove that the VMS was generated by that algorithm, it would still have a non-trivial contents -- namely, that bit sequence, that could encode a meaningful message.

All the best, --stolfi