- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
'P' is the key
- 'P' is the key
-
RE: 'P' is the key
Loose_Spell_9313 > 08-03-2026, 09:13 PM
Quote: No, it is not more than nothing. If you take any two creased/damaged pieces of parchment and try to align creases, marks, and folds you will always be able to match things.
How am I meant to align the paper correctly? I was matching the bottom edge of the paper to the fold on the map parchment, which means the right side doesnt align. If I rotate the image to align with the right side, the bottom no longer matches the fold line. The scale is important here by the way, you can't just plop the image at any scale and say "look it matches!".
Your argument is that they match, but they don't. My point is that no matter how you do this, no orientation matches beyond both having some kind of stain on the right edge (and the stains do not match). I genuinely had a look, tried it upside down, reversed, flipped, stretched, and more and never could I get a match. To say they genuinely match is a reach, im sorry.
I did have a question, actually- where have you sourced the information for your proposed size for the Map with Ship?
The 29cm is for the on-sheet version of 'Map with Ship'. As per Library of Congress; You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
"Medium- 1 map : ms., vellum ; 22 x 19 cm., on sheet 29 x 41 cm."
So, no- actually, as I stated, my version is more accurate to the 23.5cm of the Voynich, and to the truth. Please stop spreading misinformation.
the Anti-meridian and post-meridian timekeeping system was well established historical fact dating back to the Romans (there is usage pre-dating them obviously, but just for a relevant and time appropriate example). I don't know why I would choose to view it as a 24 hour clock when that's not true of timekeeping systems of the time? - 1 map : ms., vellum ; 22 x 19 cm., on sheet 29 x 41 cm."
-
RE: 'P' is the key
eggyk > 08-03-2026, 09:40 PM
(08-03-2026, 09:13 PM)Loose_Spell_9313 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I did have a question, actually- where have you sourced the information for your proposed size for the Map with Ship?
The 29cm is for the on-sheet version of 'Map with Ship'. As per Library of Congress; You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
"Medium- 1 map : ms., vellum ; 22 x 19 cm., on sheet 29 x 41 cm."
So, no- actually, as I stated, my version is more accurate to the 23.5cm of the Voynich, and to the truth. Please stop spreading misinformation.
What? I stated 29cm x 41cm.
(08-03-2026, 07:22 PM)eggyk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The map with ship vellum is 29cm high x 41cm wide, while You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is ~22.5cm high. So it would be more like this (my best attempt):
You literally posted the images where you scaled the VMS to the same size as the "map with ship" image. One is 29cm high, and the other is ~22.5cm high. Look, i'll even move it down to show that's what happened.
How dare you? I'm taking your suggestions seriously, giving feedback, making an effort to see your point of view and your response is to accuse me of spreading misinformation.
(08-03-2026, 09:13 PM)Loose_Spell_9313 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.the Anti-meridian and post-meridian timekeeping system was well established historical fact dating back to the Romans (there is usage pre-dating them obviously, but just for a relevant and time appropriate example). I don't know why I would choose to view it as a 24 hour clock when that's not true of timekeeping systems of the time?
I didn't say you have to, I asked why not and you gave an answer. I also asked if the patterns that I mentioned for the 12 hour interpretation match anywhere.
Edit: If you are saying the vellum in the image is 22cm x 19cm, that makes no sense. Its a clear rectangle, not a square. Its far more wide than tall as well. The 22x19 is the size of the map, I believe. Something like this:
- 1 map : ms., vellum ; 22 x 19 cm., on sheet 29 x 41 cm."
-
RE: 'P' is the key
Loose_Spell_9313 > 08-03-2026, 09:58 PM
Okay, I'll entertain the notion you weren't intentionally lying. Here's what I have issue with...
You opened with the statement:
Quote:"The map with ship vellum is 29cm high x 41cm wide, while You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is ~22.5cm high. So it would be more like this (my best attempt):"
This is categorically untrue and I don't know why you would go through the effort of going and getting the measurements and then obfuscating that not only is that not the vellum dimensions, but avoiding listing the vellum vs sheet dimensions. The 'Map with Ship' vellum is 22cm & Voynich is 23.5cm.
Anything after this, I gotta be honest I checked out.
With the real measurements and only a 1.5cm discrepancy, scaling the height appropriately is sound. And I'd imagine you'd find that in the version I posted, there is also an additional buffer at the bottom, which would further account for any discrepancies in the 1.5cm. -
RE: 'P' is the key
eggyk > 08-03-2026, 10:01 PM
(08-03-2026, 09:58 PM)Loose_Spell_9313 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Okay, I'll entertain the notion you weren't intentionally lying. Here's what I have issue with...
You opened with the statement:
Quote:"The map with ship vellum is 29cm high x 41cm wide, while You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is ~22.5cm high. So it would be more like this (my best attempt):"
This is categorically untrue and I don't know why you would go through the effort of going and getting the measurements and then obfuscating that not only is that not the vellum dimensions, but avoiding listing the vellum vs sheet dimensions. The 'Map with Ship' vellum is 23.5cm.
Anything after this, I gotta be honest I checked out.
With the real measurements and only a 1.5cm discrepancy, scaling the height appropriately is sound. And I'd imagine you'd find that in the version I posted, there is also an additional buffer at the bottom, which would further account for any discrepancies in the 1.5cm.
You replied as I edited my post, I mentioned what I took the measurements to mean. I'll post again in case.
If you are saying the vellum in the image is 22cm x 19cm, that makes no sense. Its a clear rectangle, not a square. Its far more wide than tall as well. The 22x19 is the size of the map, I believe. Something like this:
-
RE: 'P' is the key
Loose_Spell_9313 > 08-03-2026, 10:05 PM
(08-03-2026, 10:01 PM)eggyk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(08-03-2026, 09:58 PM)Loose_Spell_9313 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Okay, I'll entertain the notion you weren't intentionally lying. Here's what I have issue with...
You opened with the statement:
Quote:"The map with ship vellum is 29cm high x 41cm wide, while You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is ~22.5cm high. So it would be more like this (my best attempt):"
This is categorically untrue and I don't know why you would go through the effort of going and getting the measurements and then obfuscating that not only is that not the vellum dimensions, but avoiding listing the vellum vs sheet dimensions. The 'Map with Ship' vellum is 23.5cm.
Anything after this, I gotta be honest I checked out.
With the real measurements and only a 1.5cm discrepancy, scaling the height appropriately is sound. And I'd imagine you'd find that in the version I posted, there is also an additional buffer at the bottom, which would further account for any discrepancies in the 1.5cm.
You replied as I edited my post, I mentioned what I took the measurements to mean. I'll post again in case.
If you are saying the vellum in the image is 22cm x 19cm, that makes no sense. Its a clear rectangle, not a square. Its far more wide than tall as well. The 22x19 is the size of the map, I believe. Something like this:
You're using the wrong measurement still for the 'Map with Ship'. Please see my previous statement. -
RE: 'P' is the key
Loose_Spell_9313 > 08-03-2026, 10:12 PM
(08-03-2026, 10:08 PM)eggyk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(08-03-2026, 10:05 PM)Loose_Spell_9313 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.You're using the wrong measurement still for the 'Map with Ship'. Please see my previous statement.
You think that that vellum is 22cm x 19cm?
It's not a matter of what I think, it's a matter of established fact. You already know this though, because you've already searched it enough to know what the sheet dimensions were.
Quote:The 29cm is for the on-sheet version of 'Map with Ship'. As per Library of Congress; You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
"Medium- 1 map : ms., vellum ; 22 x 19 cm., on sheet 29 x 41 cm."
-
RE: 'P' is the key
eggyk > 08-03-2026, 10:32 PM
(08-03-2026, 10:12 PM)Loose_Spell_9313 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It's not a matter of what I think, it's a matter of established fact. You already know this though, because you've already searched it enough to know what the sheet dimensions were.
Quote:The 29cm is for the on-sheet version of 'Map with Ship'. As per Library of Congress; You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
"Medium- 1 map : ms., vellum ; 22 x 19 cm., on sheet 29 x 41 cm."
The MAP (the thing with the land and sea) is 22x19cm, on a sheet of VELLUM sized 29cm x 41cm.
Use your eyes. One side is far longer. In fact, the TIF file that I downloaded from the site is 3290x4701 pixels, so the image is 1.42x wider than it is tall. Guess what 29cm * 1.42 is roughly? 41cm.
(08-03-2026, 09:58 PM)Loose_Spell_9313 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Okay, I'll entertain the notion you weren't intentionally lying. Here's what I have issue with...
I have come into this conversation in good faith, and you have accused me of spreading misinfomation, lying, and obfuscating when I haven't done any of that. I took your theory at face value and tried to respect it and give it genuine feedback. I sat there trying to match what you did, tried to align things (you forgot the part where I also tried aligning the sheets at the same scale that you did and many other scales, but nevermind).
(05-03-2026, 09:16 PM)Loose_Spell_9313 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I am willing to answer any questions or explore more, but please be respectful if you choose to engage- that's all I ask.
Follow your own request and be respectful. I really doubt anyone else is going to give you or your theory as much of a benefit of the doubt as I have. -
RE: 'P' is the key
Loose_Spell_9313 > 08-03-2026, 10:34 PM
Sorry, there were some typos in the past post. So many things to reply to and the 22 & 23.5 got mixed up in some of the previous statements with Voynich & Map with Ship in the heat of the moment.
I think I've updated them all for consistency purposes, but I will acknowledge quoted material may reflect 23.5 when referring to the Map with Ship in the previous statements, but it should have 22cm.
A clarification of true dimensions
Voynich: 23.5 cm × 16.2 cm ([i]23.5 cm × 16; You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.)[/i]
Map with Ship: 1 map : ms., vellum ; 22 x 19 cm., on sheet 29 x 41 cm. (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.) -
RE: 'P' is the key
eggyk > 08-03-2026, 10:45 PM
(08-03-2026, 10:34 PM)Loose_Spell_9313 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Map with Ship: 1 map : ms., vellum ; 22 x 19 cm., on sheet 29 x 41 cm. (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.)
I already explained that the MAP is 22x19cm on a sheet of vellum sized 29x41cm. It is impossible for the vellum to have those dimensions, because one side is 1.42x longer than the other.
How is 19cm 1.42x longer than 22cm?
How is 22cm 1.42x longer than 19cm?