It’s obviously way too early for such a big test! I’ve only just figured out the structure. Right now, I’ve got maybe a few small letters and sequences. I'd have to make too many unconfirmed assumptions, as shown in the previous test. I actually thought I'd made that clear enough. And it would take me weeks to do it!
And as explained above, that wouldn't prove anything, because it would be a circular test.
4. One point you have clearly overlooked is this: at the level of argument you are using, even producing 200 pages would not prove the model. The VMS is clearly based on a slot-like system, as Stolfi has shown. If one simply maps frequent plaintext elements onto frequent Voynich glyphs, bigrams, and trigrams within that slot system, a Voynich-like surface will inevitably emerge. Treating that as proof would be circular.
Ultimately - and I think we can all agree on this - the only proof is plain text that produces clear and coherent sentences, not this Eisegesis nonsense... And that’s what I’ll be working toward, but it could still take months.
But even if it isn’t MHD/FHND, this structure is present in the text and, with the simplest assumptions, explains a great deal of the statistical anomalies. It also proves that VMS can, at least theoretically, be a language, despite these anomalies, and that alone refutes the part of the hoax theory that claims VMS cannot be a language.
And as explained above, that wouldn't prove anything, because it would be a circular test.
4. One point you have clearly overlooked is this: at the level of argument you are using, even producing 200 pages would not prove the model. The VMS is clearly based on a slot-like system, as Stolfi has shown. If one simply maps frequent plaintext elements onto frequent Voynich glyphs, bigrams, and trigrams within that slot system, a Voynich-like surface will inevitably emerge. Treating that as proof would be circular.
Ultimately - and I think we can all agree on this - the only proof is plain text that produces clear and coherent sentences, not this Eisegesis nonsense... And that’s what I’ll be working toward, but it could still take months.
But even if it isn’t MHD/FHND, this structure is present in the text and, with the simplest assumptions, explains a great deal of the statistical anomalies. It also proves that VMS can, at least theoretically, be a language, despite these anomalies, and that alone refutes the part of the hoax theory that claims VMS cannot be a language.