• Options
• Login
• Desktop Style

I've deciphered the Voynich Manuscript. Here is the alphabet of the manuscript, the t

• Index

  • The Voynich Ninja
  • Voynich Research
  • Theories & Solutions
  • I've deciphered the Voynich Manuscript. Here is the alphabet of the manuscript, the t
• I've deciphered the Voynich Manuscript. Here is the alphabet of the manuscript, the t

• RE: Is 75% decryption a small thing?

  Michael Obraztsov > 07-07-2025, 10:56 PM

  (07-07-2025, 09:01 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.As I've shown in this You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., using a mix of words from different languages you can create a somewhat meaningful text from almost any combination of characters. So, from my point of view you haven't decrypted any part of the Voynich Manuscript and to me the lack of interest in your solution is totally expected.

  
  
  By the way, can you tell me someone who can organize a quick calculation of the percentage of recognized words from the Voynich manuscript using special programs based on my alphabet?

• RE: Is 75% decryption a small thing?

  oshfdk > 07-07-2025, 11:05 PM

  (07-07-2025, 10:29 PM)Michael Obraztsov Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.About the unoriginality. Why talk in hints? If you are aware of the unoriginality of my case, could you point out exactly where my approach coincides with other people's approaches?
  
  Of course, I understood what you didn't translate. However, you have made the argument that it is easy to combine anything with anything. I answered you with a counterargument: if it's easy, let's delve into this question. My solution is quite clear. If you think it's easy to do something like this, try it. Then please provide the alphabet, as I did.

  
  This is not a tournament of solutions. If you want your solution to be seriously considered, it's up to you to provide a persuasive argument as to why your solution is any good. Since there so far has been little interest towards your solution, your argument is obviously not strong enough for other people. It doesn't matter what you think yourself about your solution, it can only be accepted if other people find it good. 
  
  There are many ways to make your argument stronger, but you have to do this before you can expect other people to spend any serious effort on proving or disproving your case.
  
  If you indeed can read the manuscript, you can easily make your argument stronger. For example, you can find some specific information about the author or the locations in the text. You can find if the manuscript references or quotes any other works. You can identify the proper title of the manuscript to check whether is was referenced in other contemporary works. You can find some specific local words which could help to pinpoint where the author was from.
  

  ---

  (07-07-2025, 10:56 PM)Michael Obraztsov Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.By the way, can you tell me someone who can organize a quick calculation of the percentage of recognized words from the Voynich manuscript using special programs based on my alphabet?

  
  I think a person who has deciphered the Voynich Manuscript can certainly solve this minor problem.

• RE: Translation of half a page of the Voynich manuscript

  Ruby Novacna > 08-07-2025, 12:17 AM

  (07-07-2025, 08:00 PM)Michael Obraztsov Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

  (07-07-2025, 12:05 PM)Ruby Novacna Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.1. Are you aware that there are several transcriptions of this manuscript? 
  2. In addition to Archive.org, there are other sources of manuscript images that are easier to open and download.
  3. On this forum, there have been suggestions for presenting the results; I quote from memory: transcription / your reading / smoothed translation.

  
  1. Of course I know about Voynich fonts.
  2. You recommend giving me links.
  3. Against the background of the fact that I deciphered the manuscript, it hardly matters to me whether I expressed it in font or through screenshots.  

  
  1. Transcription/transliteration, not the font.
  2. Other image sources, although valid links will also make a good impression.
  3. Transcription, not the font. This would allow for statistical calculations if necessary.

• RE: I've deciphered the Voynich Manuscript. Here is the alphabet of the manuscript, the t

  Michael Obraztsov > 08-07-2025, 07:48 PM

  (07-07-2025, 10:51 PM)tavie Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Please read the discussion threads for other solutions. You have hundreds of rivals, over sixty of which are logged on this site.
  
  Many of your rival Solvers have found hundreds or thousands of words in their chosen language. You are allowing multiple languages in your decryption, so it is even easier for you to find "matches". You are casting a wide net so of course you find something.

  
  1."Many of your rival Solvers have found hundreds or thousands of words in their chosen language" - here is an important question: have they translated hundreds and thousands of words, translating many sentences in a row, translating from random samples, or limiting themselves to convenient words and phrases in different places of the text? And also, what percentage of such words completely match words from dictionaries, and what percentage only partially, with the root and the like?
  2. Is there a record on the website of how many words of the Voynich manuscript were recognized by the program based on the alphabet proposed by one person or another? If it is not being conducted, then why? That's a big omission.
  3. Suppose my interpretation is trivial, and with three languages, 75% of the recognized text can be obtained with many alphabet variants. But has there been any research on this topic? Would you recommend someone who knows how to use special programs well, who would use such programs to calculate the number of recognizable words of the Voynich manuscript based on my alphabet? I would also like to learn from such people about experiments with more than one language and the percentage of recognized words for each case. Are there such people here and the practice of calculating the percentage of recognized words using programs?

• RE: Is 75% decryption a small thing?

  Michael Obraztsov > 08-07-2025, 07:58 PM

  (07-07-2025, 11:05 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

  (07-07-2025, 10:29 PM)Michael Obraztsov Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.About the unoriginality. Why talk in hints? If you are aware of the unoriginality of my case, could you point out exactly where my approach coincides with other people's approaches?
  
  Of course, I understood what you didn't translate. However, you have made the argument that it is easy to combine anything with anything. I answered you with a counterargument: if it's easy, let's delve into this question. My solution is quite clear. If you think it's easy to do something like this, try it. Then please provide the alphabet, as I did.

  
  This is not a tournament of solutions. If you want your solution to be seriously considered, it's up to you to provide a persuasive argument as to why your solution is any good. Since there so far has been little interest towards your solution, your argument is obviously not strong enough for other people. It doesn't matter what you think yourself about your solution, it can only be accepted if other people find it good. 
  
  There are many ways to make your argument stronger, but you have to do this before you can expect other people to spend any serious effort on proving or disproving your case.
  
  If you indeed can read the manuscript, you can easily make your argument stronger. For example, you can find some specific information about the author or the locations in the text. You can find if the manuscript references or quotes any other works. You can identify the proper title of the manuscript to check whether is was referenced in other contemporary works. You can find some specific local words which could help to pinpoint where the author was from.
  

  ---

  (07-07-2025, 10:56 PM)Michael Obraztsov Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.By the way, can you tell me someone who can organize a quick calculation of the percentage of recognized words from the Voynich manuscript using special programs based on my alphabet?

  
  I think a person who has deciphered the Voynich Manuscript can certainly solve this minor problem.

  
  Of course, he can solve it. But not everything depends on the brain of such a person. A lot also depends on the circumstances of the environment. The circumstances are such that if I do all this myself, I will need to both spend time earning money for this, and spend time looking for ways to implement this idea, as well as finding people who will confirm my correctness.
  
  And you're pouring out your anger, just like in one chat where they also hated me. It looks like you're from there.
  

  ---

  (07-07-2025, 11:05 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

  (07-07-2025, 10:29 PM)Michael Obraztsov Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.About the unoriginality. Why talk in hints? If you are aware of the unoriginality of my case, could you point out exactly where my approach coincides with other people's approaches?
  
  Of course, I understood what you didn't translate. However, you have made the argument that it is easy to combine anything with anything. I answered you with a counterargument: if it's easy, let's delve into this question. My solution is quite clear. If you think it's easy to do something like this, try it. Then please provide the alphabet, as I did.

  
  This is not a tournament of solutions. If you want your solution to be seriously considered, it's up to you to provide a persuasive argument as to why your solution is any good. Since there so far has been little interest towards your solution, your argument is obviously not strong enough for other people. It doesn't matter what you think yourself about your solution, it can only be accepted if other people find it good. 
  
  There are many ways to make your argument stronger, but you have to do this before you can expect other people to spend any serious effort on proving or disproving your case.
  
  If you indeed can read the manuscript, you can easily make your argument stronger. For example, you can find some specific information about the author or the locations in the text. You can find if the manuscript references or quotes any other works. You can identify the proper title of the manuscript to check whether is was referenced in other contemporary works. You can find some specific local words which could help to pinpoint where the author was from.
  

  ---

  (07-07-2025, 10:56 PM)Michael Obraztsov Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.By the way, can you tell me someone who can organize a quick calculation of the percentage of recognized words from the Voynich manuscript using special programs based on my alphabet?

  
  I think a person who has deciphered the Voynich Manuscript can certainly solve this minor problem.

  
  Are you toxic

• RE: Is 75% decryption a small thing?

  oshfdk > 08-07-2025, 09:39 PM

  (08-07-2025, 07:58 PM)Michael Obraztsov Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Of course, he can solve it. But not everything depends on the brain of such a person. A lot also depends on the circumstances of the environment. The circumstances are such that if I do all this myself, I will need to both spend time earning money for this, and spend time looking for ways to implement this idea, as well as finding people who will confirm my correctness.
  
  And you're pouring out your anger, just like in one chat where they also hated me. It looks like you're from there.

  
  I'm not angry at all. If anything, I'm amused. And I'm not participating in any chats about the Voynich Manuscript.
  
  I've tried to explain to you what specifically you can do to make people treat your idea seriously. It's totally up to you whether to take my advice or not, but if you don't then I see no reason to spend much time on your solution. To me it looks obviously wrong.

• RE: Is 75% decryption a small thing?

  Michael Obraztsov > 09-07-2025, 07:49 AM

  (08-07-2025, 09:39 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

  (08-07-2025, 07:58 PM)Michael Obraztsov Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Of course, he can solve it. But not everything depends on the brain of such a person. A lot also depends on the circumstances of the environment. The circumstances are such that if I do all this myself, I will need to both spend time earning money for this, and spend time looking for ways to implement this idea, as well as finding people who will confirm my correctness.
  
  And you're pouring out your anger, just like in one chat where they also hated me. It looks like you're from there.

  
  I'm not angry at all. If anything, I'm amused. And I'm not participating in any chats about the Voynich Manuscript.
  
  I've tried to explain to you what specifically you can do to make people treat your idea seriously. It's totally up to you whether to take my advice or not, but if you don't then I see no reason to spend much time on your solution. To me it looks obviously wrong.

  
  
  I wrote about a chat that had nothing to do with voynich.ninja
  
  Why do you think my decision is clearly wrong?
  
  The details you describe can only be clarified by translating a lot of pages, and this takes time. I wish that until I had time to translate a lot, my work was appreciated for the high percentage of text recognition, if such a percentage is a record.

• RE: Is 75% decryption a small thing?

  Michael Obraztsov > 09-07-2025, 08:05 AM

  (07-07-2025, 11:05 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

  (07-07-2025, 10:29 PM)Michael Obraztsov Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.About the unoriginality. Why talk in hints? If you are aware of the unoriginality of my case, could you point out exactly where my approach coincides with other people's approaches?
  
  Of course, I understood what you didn't translate. However, you have made the argument that it is easy to combine anything with anything. I answered you with a counterargument: if it's easy, let's delve into this question. My solution is quite clear. If you think it's easy to do something like this, try it. Then please provide the alphabet, as I did.

  
  This is not a tournament of solutions. If you want your solution to be seriously considered, it's up to you to provide a persuasive argument as to why your solution is any good. Since there so far has been little interest towards your solution, your argument is obviously not strong enough for other people. It doesn't matter what you think yourself about your solution, it can only be accepted if other people find it good. 
  
  There are many ways to make your argument stronger, but you have to do this before you can expect other people to spend any serious effort on proving or disproving your case.
  
  If you indeed can read the manuscript, you can easily make your argument stronger. For example, you can find some specific information about the author or the locations in the text. You can find if the manuscript references or quotes any other works. You can identify the proper title of the manuscript to check whether is was referenced in other contemporary works. You can find some specific local words which could help to pinpoint where the author was from.
  

  ---

  (07-07-2025, 10:56 PM)Michael Obraztsov Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.By the way, can you tell me someone who can organize a quick calculation of the percentage of recognized words from the Voynich manuscript using special programs based on my alphabet?

  
  I think a person who has deciphered the Voynich Manuscript can certainly solve this minor problem.

  
  
  So what about other people's records regarding the percentage of recognized text? You don't know?

• RE: Is 75% decryption a small thing?

  oshfdk > 09-07-2025, 08:13 AM

  (09-07-2025, 07:49 AM)Michael Obraztsov Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Why do you think my decision is clearly wrong?
  
  The details you describe can only be clarified by translating a lot of pages, and this takes time. I wish that until I had time to translate a lot, my work was appreciated for the high percentage of text recognition, if such a percentage is a record.

  
  If you are not ready to put more effort into understanding the critiques or providing a stronger argument, it's strange to expect other people to appreciate your work. 
  
  I said what's wrong with your approach in my very first post on this topic. Anyone can achieve 100% of "text recognition" using the same method. It's trivial and I think it's a waste of time.
  

  ---

  (09-07-2025, 08:05 AM)Michael Obraztsov Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So what about other people's records regarding the percentage of recognized text? You don't know?

  
  There is one universally accepted record - and it's 0%. It was first achieved by Newbold in the 1920s and to this day I don't think it has been beaten.

• RE: Translation of half a page of the Voynich manuscript

  Eiríkur > 09-07-2025, 09:49 AM

  (07-07-2025, 08:00 PM)Michael Obraztsov Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.As far as I know, Cheshire showed the best result before me with 44 percent. Am I wrong?

  
  My concern would be with your definition of "best." It's not a competition. Chesire is just another solver like yourself.
  He didn't study the existing research. Doesn't know the state of knowledge, which, outside of clickbait for the unwary, is astonishingly good. Chesire was an aspiring academic who encountered the Voynich but did not join the team. I don't understand why a person would not bootstrap their work by reading about what has worked and what hasn't  Just the ideas I've encountered in the papers and blog. I date back to the Sapir-Whorf era of linguistics (I'm not a linguist) where it was frequently said that you can't think about something if you don't have the vocabulary. 
  
  You can't swing a cat around here with knocking over a few polymathic geniuses. People you'll meet here have been working for decades forming and discarding hypotheses, as one must. That's why you not knowing where we are today is frustrating. It's almost impossible to have a conversation with you. I'm not claiming any credit. My attendance has been spotty. Every single time I've had 'an original thought' recently, I've eventually found some research that covers it. Maybe behind an academic paywall. That usually takes too long and I've already written my own program :-(
  
  You'd be more humble and less frustrated if you had read the giants in our field. I started out humble and I keep getting bushwacked by the manuscript. It's merciless. It's not what it looks like. Just looking at a single line of Voynichese text, carefully, perhaps comparing it to running text in your choice of language, there are tells that tell you that something isn't right. This stuff isn't a secret. If it were, I wouldn't tell you that you're not working on the real problem. You're spending your time on a surface level, going with your gut, that doesn't explain things that are very visible on the page. Mary D'Imperio's book is a free download from the NSA. She and Currier and  Tiltman would have rolled their eyes at you in the 1970s.  Voyniocheros see this as a team effort because we've seen the magnitude of the problem, and kept educating ourselves and each other. I'd like to see some further progress in my lifetime, but Voynich is a priceless education, and  the company is great.
• Next Oldest Next Newest