- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
Voynich Decoded
- Voynich Decoded
-
RE: Voynich Decoded
rikforto > 4 hours ago
(5 hours ago)Kris1212 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(6 hours ago)rikforto Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Another user keyed me into the issue and I can now access your uploads. Unless I am missing something, you do not justify your assertions or changes to how you interpret the symbols beyond some vague gestures at late-medieval systems. That you were able to so readily and seamlessly change the meaning of the symbols in your five revisions strikes me as proof that the interpretation you're offering is, at best, arbitrary and unfalsifiable. Mind, I am not saying that your theory should be "locked in" once you publish, but the fact you were able to read many symbols multiple ways without justifying those readings is a better demonstration of the arbitrariness of this system than I would have had the time or inclination to produce. Unless you can systematically show that these symbols have the meaning you assert, the patterns you identify are highly dependent on your subjective gloss and I see no reason anyone should adopt your interpretation.
It's fully documented - all data, counts, and evolution across five papers. The current key shows the glyph shapes and their meanings. The system works consistently across every folio I've decoded. The most up to date key is in every folder, nothing is subjective, it's all from data counts, the only subjective part is Lucrezia Tournabuoni and I got a hot lead on linking her to it too. Can you show me anyone else who has decoded page after page using a consistent system and published it publicly? So You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is coming up, look or don't look, I'm continuing anyway :-) I'll work on video after work and hand hold you through the entire process.
Perhaps I am being unclear. I believe your decryption (but not, as far as I can tell, plant identification) is internally consistent and reproducible. I also do not doubt that the overwhelming majority of the features you've described---the colors and symbols per se---actually exist in the manuscript, and applying the glosses that you provide in the key is straightforward. Indeed, the fact that you have provided 6 different keys with this property is part of *my* proof that this is quite likely arbitrary.
What I have been driving at is that the logically prior step, namely that of justifying your key, appears to be missing. I have made a good faith effort to solicit or locate that explanation, but so far you have not identified it for me. As near as I can tell everything you've directed me towards is dependent on the readings you have put forward rather than antecedent to it. Unless I gravely misunderstand your argument, the key appears for the first time in 2025 without a breath of circumstantial evidence that it existed beforehand. Can you point to anything specific outside your perception of the manuscript that provides evidence for your key? What prevents me from replacing the words you've put down in any iteration to gloss the EVA script with randomly selected words? Aside from a few of these words being more recent coinages, what distinguishes this list from any of the 6 you've given?
-
RE: Voynich Decoded
tavie > 4 hours ago
A reminder to everyone: it's easier for people to read your posts if you only quote what you need. Some of the posts on the last page are a quote of a quote of a quote of a quote of a quote. That's hard to follow, especially on mobile.
You can erase the parts of the quote, including nested quotes, that aren't directly relevant to your reply. -
RE: Voynich Decoded
Kris1212 > 3 hours ago
Perhaps I am being unclear. I believe your decryption (but not, as far as I can tell, plant identification) is internally consistent and reproducible. I also do not doubt that the overwhelming majority of the features you've described---the colors and symbols per se---actually exist in the manuscript, and applying the glosses that you provide in the key is straightforward. Indeed, the fact that you have provided 6 different keys with this property is part of *my* proof that this is quite likely arbitrary.
What I have been driving at is that the logically prior step, namely that of justifying your key, appears to be missing. I have made a good faith effort to solicit or locate that explanation, but so far you have not identified it for me. As near as I can tell everything you've directed me towards is dependent on the readings you have put forward rather than antecedent to it. Unless I gravely misunderstand your argument, the key appears for the first time in 2025 without a breath of circumstantial evidence that it existed beforehand. Can you point to anything specific outside your perception of the manuscript that provides evidence for your key? What prevents me from replacing the words you've put down in any iteration to gloss the EVA script with randomly selected words? Aside from a few of these words being more recent coinages, what distinguishes this list from any of the 6 you've given?
[/quote]
The key isn't arbitrary, it's from data counts and logic. There are many rules fully documented as I've gone along.
For example, why does iiid exist but not iiiid? Why does iiiin exist but not iiiiin? Why do we never see ff, tt, kk, or pp doubled? You can't have two planets together - no Saturn Saturn, no Mars Mars. What can Jupiter get between? Why the difference between upper and plagal tones? Why can only f, t, k, p get between ch?
It all has to be logical. I worked this out through frequency counts, positional analysis, pairing matrices, and structural constraints. The glyphs follow rules - certain combinations never appear, certain positions are fixed, certain maximums exist.
Random word substitution wouldn't follow these rules. Your substitutions would create impossible glyph combinations the manuscript never shows, frequency distributions that don't match the actual data, and violations of the manuscript's internal logic.
The system has discoverable mathematical and structural rules that prove it's encoding something specific, not arbitrary text. All documented in my papers as I discovered them.
When I'm done with more decoding I'll write up a comprehensive rules list, but right now my focus is on the code and moving forward with the sequential decode. -
RE: Voynich Decoded
Kris1212 > 3 hours ago
(7 hours ago)tavie Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.No papers are showing up for me either. Are they only available to people with accounts on academia? Or have you made them private?
Not sure, Academia is working for others think you have to sign in, website is under construction that's why the 404, I haven't had the time to do it and I'm going to change it all, it's a bit too scooby doo mystery at the moment.
And on your website, I get 404s from your links. -
RE: Voynich Decoded
Kris1212 > 3 hours ago
Sap alchemy is not a (known) thing in medieval sources, so external validation is impossible. There could be some internal logic worth studying if only we could understand what it is. Claims that "it works" are just claims without detailed explanations.
[/quote]
Sap alchemy isn't the term - it's vital fluid. Renaissance medicine understood fluids as carriers of vital essence, whether in plants (sap) or humans (humors).
Plant pages extract vital fluid (sap). Human treatment pages work with humors, shown by color: yellow = sanguine, white = phlegm, red = blood, dirty grey = black bile.
The system is: extract sap from real plant page, process it through You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (master preparation schedule), apply it to treat the humor problem on the following treatment page. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. lemon sap → treats You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. issue. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. caper sap → treats You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. problem. Sequential pairing through F57.
Then You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. shows the masturbation schedule - here the vital fluid is semen, dose is the prepared sap. Simple visual instructions with timing markers (sunrise, noon, sunset) showing when to do what. Images show where on the body. It's a complete elite fertility treatment system. -
RE: Voynich Decoded
rikforto > 1 hour ago
You are starting to provide a reproducible picture of your thinking. Perhaps we can nail down a few other parts of this.
(3 hours ago)Kris1212 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Random word substitution wouldn't follow these rules. Your substitutions would create impossible glyph combinations the manuscript never shows, frequency distributions that don't match the actual data, and violations of the manuscript's internal logic.
Unless I misunderstand the key, placing my words in would result in the same distribution as your glosses. Or are you also manipulating the text beyond the substitutions you propose in the Sheets page?
Note that scrambling some of your glosses, e.g., flipping earth (EVA-eeee) and fire (EVA-e), would result in a viable code, as did the five (presumably incorrect!) proposals you made before the current one. Nowhere that I've seen have you attempted to explain how you know that the Voynich authors would have constructed it this way, and not any other.
(3 hours ago)Kris1212 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.For example, why does iiid exist but not iiiid? Why does iiiin exist but not iiiiin?
There are several conjectures for why the number of consecutive minima is constrained. The Roman Numeral hypothesis is one of them, but it also matches conventions in abbreviations in period manuscripts. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. It's not enough to offer a new conjecture, you need to logically establish that yours is the most plausible. I don't see any argument at all for minima to represent consonant intervals broadly or the ones you give, or how we'd establish that the author, who was a real person who designed this system, had these thoughts about intervals.
(3 hours ago)Kris1212 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Why do we never see ff, tt, kk, or pp doubled? You can't have two planets together - no Saturn Saturn, no Mars Mars. What can Jupiter get between? Why the difference between upper and plagal tones? Why can only f, t, k, p get between ch?
These are good questions! The idea they are resolved if these are symbols for the planets is an interesting conjecture, and one probably worth exploring if someone can get a more grounded starting point, but you need significantly more than "they cannot appear in pairs" to establish the astrological connection here, and especially if you're going to assign them to particular planets within a particular period system. For instance "Divine Source" is not obviously a planet to me (is it a euphemism for Venus? if not, where is she?), yet is treated in line with three other classical planets. Mercury gets his own treatment, behaving differently, which I'm given to understand might have some precedent in some medical systems, but you need to establish that, and how the VM coheres to one system with that trait specifically. Likewise, if EVA-g is Mercury and Mercury has special significance, you need to establish why EVA-g and EVA-m is so divergent despite strong visual similarity. Despite a good deal of unjustified specificity, the system as presented is also fantastically vague about where it gets those and other details from.
(3 hours ago)Kris1212 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I worked this out through frequency counts, positional analysis, pairing matrices, and structural constraints. The glyphs follow rules - certain combinations never appear, certain positions are fixed, certain maximums exist.
Publishing the logic you used to work this out would make the pages you are posting transparent, or at least explain why they are so opaque as they stand. This, rather than the interpretations, will be the beating heart of your solution if my suspicions are wrong and the glosses you've provided really can be logically demonstrated. This will make it possible to evaluate the glosses one way or the other. -
RE: Voynich Decoded
tavie > 26 minutes ago
(3 hours ago)Kris1212 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Why do we never see ff, tt, kk, or pp doubled? You can't have two planets together - no Saturn Saturn, no Mars Mars.
From a mere cosmetic point of view, gallows glyphs would look awful written together. All of them have a rightside loop that would clash into the next gallows. I'm not saying that is the reason (although I do have a headcanon that the scribes's glyph choice may have at least partially been influenced by avoiding clashes) since there are other glyphs that aren't commonly duplicated that could easily be so in theory.
And that takes me onto a wider point: Voynichese really doesn't like duplicating glyphs. It's only common for two glyphs. Probably it's less likely duplicates occur anyway, since positional rigidity means some are always initials and some are always finals. But there's nothing obvious stopping /chch/ or /aa/ and those are relatively uncommon.
So I'd be cautious about relying on that for your planet identifications.