[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: voynich@xxxxxxxx*Subject*: Re: John Chadwick (Linear B) of corpus size. Comments invited.*From*: Zandbergen@xxxxxxxxxxx (Rene Zandbergen)*Date*: Fri, 12 May 2000 21:17:34 +0200*Delivered-to*: reeds@research.att.com*References*: <391B9DBF.87F@alphalink.com.au>*Reply-to*: rene@xxxxxxxxxx*Sender*: jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Here are another pair of cents. The proposed binary encoding is a bit of a nasty trick and I suspect that Chadwick's knee-jerk reaction to such a trick might be something like: that's not what I meant. If the binary encoding is done without loss of information (which would be fair), one needs two more symbols: a character space and a word space. These were available before too. Then, any child will see that instead of 4 symbols, there really are N+2 macro-symbols, and one is back to square 1. So Chadwick's rule (valid or not) could be rephrased (in a way that makes it pretty useless) by working with such macro- symbols. That was $0,01. Here's nr.2: How does Chadwick's formula apply to the VMs? Looks pretty good for us I'm sure. So do we have one counter-example to his rule here? Or does his rule one work in one direction: you can't ... if you've got fewer than... Cheers, Rene

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: John Chadwick (Linear B) of corpus size. Comments invited.***From:*Karl Kluge

**Re: John Chadwick (Linear B) of corpus size. Comments invited.***From:*Jorge Stolfi

**References**:**John Chadwick (Linear B) of corpus size. Comments invited.***From:*Jacques Guy

- Prev by Date:
**Is there a real correlation between race and IQ?** - Next by Date:
**Re: John Chadwick (Linear B) of corpus size. Comments invited.** - Previous by thread:
**Re: John Chadwick (Linear B) of corpus size. Comments invited.** - Next by thread:
**Re: John Chadwick (Linear B) of corpus size. Comments invited.** - Index(es):