The oddities of the bigram "ed"

[Dunsel]

Two points:

- my question about "eed" was related to the suggestion that "ed" might be a single unit. While this is tempting, this then leaves the question whether "eed" is another unit, or should be read as "e" + "ed". Neither seem satisfactory to me. (words ending -edy can also end -ey, or -eedy, or -eey)

- in the graph where the text has been chopped into equal size units, and the "ed" bigram moves much closer to the rest, were the page boundaries respected? I strongly suspect not, so the pages without "ed" have been 'contaminated' by contents from pages with the bigram.

On the second point, a related statistic is given on this page: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
in the table under "At the highest level". This gives the % of words including "ed" in the various sections, which is largely independent of the page length, which was the desired point.

I believe, on all of those charts that are the ed scatter charts that page boundaries are respected.  The Y axis is the normalized page count. If I goofed one, please point it out and I'll fix it.

I've got several more posts planned, including one that's going to explain a LOT about ed and why it even came into prominence.  I'll say this, it's been known for a long time that the Voynich is bigram specific.  And what I've found doesn't dispute that one bit.  Trigrams are a bi-product.