10-12-2016, 01:01 PM
Koen Gh:
"why omit the most important part?": IMO this is probably because that is not the most important part. I just think the double rainbow would have reminded a medieval person of that imagery, but I don't think that it is the subject matter.
As for the colors... what is odd here is that the colors in the two rainbows are in the same order. In an actual double rainbow, the colors are mirrored. This had obviously been observed in nature for a long time, and theorized since Aristotle.
Theodoric of Freiberg also writes quite a bit about the formation of double rainbows and explaining why the color reversal happens. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. provides a really comprehensive history of the understanding of rainbows (page 325 onwards).
Personallly I don't generally give the Voynich manuscript colors much attention; I think whoever added them couldn't understand Voynichese, and was less able/educated than the person(s) who wrote the text and drew the illustrations.
But if we suppose that the person who added the colors did understand the text, then the question of why the rainbows have different colors might be worth pursuing.
"On the other hand, the difference of the colors of a rainbow from those of other rainbows is due to the purity and impurity of the transparent medium supporting it, as well as from the brightness and obscurity of the light impressing it. If we have a pure transparent medium and bright light, the color is whitish. If the recipient medium is a mixture of vapors and mist and the light is hazy, as occurs near the East and West, the colors are less splendid and their brightness reduced. In the same manner, according to the enumeration of brightness and obscurity of light and of purity and impurity of the medium, all the arcs of various colors can be seen." (Grosseteste, De Iride)
"why omit the most important part?": IMO this is probably because that is not the most important part. I just think the double rainbow would have reminded a medieval person of that imagery, but I don't think that it is the subject matter.
As for the colors... what is odd here is that the colors in the two rainbows are in the same order. In an actual double rainbow, the colors are mirrored. This had obviously been observed in nature for a long time, and theorized since Aristotle.
Theodoric of Freiberg also writes quite a bit about the formation of double rainbows and explaining why the color reversal happens. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. provides a really comprehensive history of the understanding of rainbows (page 325 onwards).
Personallly I don't generally give the Voynich manuscript colors much attention; I think whoever added them couldn't understand Voynichese, and was less able/educated than the person(s) who wrote the text and drew the illustrations.
But if we suppose that the person who added the colors did understand the text, then the question of why the rainbows have different colors might be worth pursuing.
"On the other hand, the difference of the colors of a rainbow from those of other rainbows is due to the purity and impurity of the transparent medium supporting it, as well as from the brightness and obscurity of the light impressing it. If we have a pure transparent medium and bright light, the color is whitish. If the recipient medium is a mixture of vapors and mist and the light is hazy, as occurs near the East and West, the colors are less splendid and their brightness reduced. In the same manner, according to the enumeration of brightness and obscurity of light and of purity and impurity of the medium, all the arcs of various colors can be seen." (Grosseteste, De Iride)
![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)