Bluetoes101 > 04-10-2025, 12:24 AM
(04-10-2025, 12:05 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(02-10-2025, 11:10 AM)Kris1212 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This explains why some Voynich cycles span long ritual counts.
What does that mean?
AI/based language models always talk about cycles and ritual, but I have never seen anyone explain what these are.
Kris1212 > 04-10-2025, 08:11 AM
(04-10-2025, 12:24 AM)Bluetoes101 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.No belief required, it's not fairies, it's data, arithmetic and placement. I only work with data not fairy stories(04-10-2025, 12:05 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(02-10-2025, 11:10 AM)Kris1212 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This explains why some Voynich cycles span long ritual counts.
What does that mean?
AI/based language models always talk about cycles and ritual, but I have never seen anyone explain what these are.
I think it's like fairies, you just have to believe or they die
Kris1212 > 04-10-2025, 08:26 AM
(04-10-2025, 12:05 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(02-10-2025, 11:10 AM)Kris1212 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This explains why some Voynich cycles span long ritual counts.
What does that mean?
AI/based language models always talk about cycles and ritual, but I have never seen anyone explain what these are.
Mauro > 04-10-2025, 02:50 PM
(04-10-2025, 08:26 AM)Kris1212 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.You should reproduce my totals. If you can’t, tell me exactly where the count breaks and I’ll fix it. It’s testable.
[*]
Kris1212 > 04-10-2025, 03:52 PM
(04-10-2025, 02:50 PM)Mauro Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.[*](04-10-2025, 08:26 AM)Kris1212 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.You should reproduce my totals. If you can’t, tell me exactly where the count breaks and I’ll fix it. It’s testable.
[*]
[*]You see, Kris, you theory is testable in the sense that one can test if it is internally coherent, and I have no doubts it is. But it is not testable in the really important sense: does the VMS represents cycles and rituals as your theory says, or is it something else?
[*]There’s no Rosetta Stone for this book and I’m not guessing a language. My code is built from the data—glyphs and text placement—nothing else. It’s repeatable: same rules, same counting, folio after folio. I've published the date repeatedly since I started so anyone can verify. If there’s another theory that produces folio-by-folio, reproducible day totals and placement rules from the manuscript itself, point me to it.
[*]It's the same situation, for instance, with Peltastri's Celtic theory: is it internally coherent? I gladly grant him it is. But does he demonstrates the VMS is a Celtic text, as opposed to, for instance, an instruction book of cycles and rituals? Think of this: let's say we are sure your theory or Peltastri's one is the right one. How can we tell which is which? Here is where testability fails.
[*]“Internally coherent” isn’t the bar. Has Peltastri fully translated a folio, end-to-end, with a stable reading? I haven’t seen one. His code is a language claim; mine isn’t—it’s a book of symbols: each page is a set of specific instructions.
Also: how does a language theory explain runs like eeee, iiii, or ooooooooo? Nonsense as phonetics; perfectly sensible as operators/quantities.
Different claims, different tests: he should produce readable text on unseen pages; I produce reproducible sequences and day totals from the glyphs. No Rosetta Stone—just counts and spreadsheets anyone can audit.
[*]Edit: why the editor decided to insert some '
[*]' baffles me.
Koen G > 04-10-2025, 09:25 PM
Kris1212 > 06-10-2025, 10:22 AM
Resonant432 > 06-10-2025, 11:36 AM
Kris1212 > 06-10-2025, 12:16 PM
(06-10-2025, 11:36 AM)Resonant432 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It's a Resonance Language, resonance math. Its a procedural manuscript, a programming language of algorithms based on the Universal Harmonic Math. If you want to see my work on this, let me know. I know programming languages well enough to know the patterns and signs of them. The algo's im getting out of it, I don't know how else I'd manage to pull them out.Yes I'd like to look but I am not of the opinion it's a language in anyway, it's all procedural I agree, up to the end of the zodiac radials and the few folios I've done beyond it's all about fertility. It's all very simple and visual, never meant to be read but looked at.