[Movie] Voynich Talk E3: Why your Voynich theory is wrong (pt2)

[Koen G]

I just uploaded a new video to YouTube. It is the second part in a series where I try (try!) to explain to theorists why their substitution cipher doesn't work. In contrast to the last video though, which focused on the well-known and often discussed entropy problem, this one should also offer some food for thought for those familiar with the statistics. The question I explore is this: if we follow the logic of a substitution cipher, and compare Voynichese to the writing systems of natural languages, then how many letters does its alphabet have? People often claim that Voynichese has a large alphabet, but the opposite is true: it' much too small.

[Bluetoes101]

Thanks for these, personally I've been really enjoying and learning a lot from your videos

[bi3mw]

Your video somehow brings me back to the theory that the VMS text could be a constructed language.  On the other hand, this is probably somewhat anachronistic.

[Koen G]

It would certainly be unique, though something being unique doesn't necessarily make it anachronistic.

Now I still wonder why a constructed language would end up looking like this. Maybe I lack imagination, but especially in the pre modern world, I think of them as still following some of the rules of familiar languages.

[Bluetoes101]

Edit: Removed comment as probably send convo into the weeds. Need to stop commenting when tired

[asteckley]

Excellent video Koen!  
Not only do you have some very perceptive and original observations -- you have conveyed them with clarity and with wonderful graphics to boot.

[BessAgritianin]

Congratulations! Very good work and a perfect exercise of the learnt at university!
     Why don't you try with making some training videos for the students?

      And now: Why Your theory is wrong?
  
    Script language is far from positional variations, and your logic proves that it should have had a lot of more symbols, but it doesn't.
 The contrary is true, there are the same symbols but with different sounds behind them. 
 And exactly this is the cipher of the wise, wise man, whoever he is.

 Good Job at video making!
 BR: Vessy

[Koen G]

Script language is far from positional variations, and your logic proves that it should have had a lot of more symbols, but it doesn't.
 The contrary is true, there are the same symbols but with different sounds behind them. 
 And exactly this is the cipher of the wise, wise man, whoever he is.

This is indeed often the theorists' approach. And that's also why many theories need an "interpretative step", where the theorist chooses which sounds suit them best. The common response against this is that it leads to an exponential increase in possible readings, making the message impossible to retrieve.

[Koen G]

Looks like I'm reaching a wider audience 

   

[Ruby Novacna]

...there are the same symbols but with different sounds behind them. 

As in ciphers based on the Polybius square?