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

VMs: RE: AW: VMs as Numbers



Title: AW: Re: VMs as Numbers
Unfortunately, As Rene pointed out any numbering system that relies on the styles of gallows has a slight flaw > the one leggers only appear on the first line of a paragraph. So, this means Claus' arbitrary numbering schema would only use the number 2,3,7,8 on the first line of paragraphs. It also means that in Nick's numbering schema the 30's, 40's, 80's and 90's can only appear in the first line of a paragraph...
 
John.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-voynich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-voynich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Anders, Claus
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 5:31 AM
To: Voynich Ms. mailing list
Subject: VMs: AW: Re: VMs as Numbers

You can (if you will) make up the following combinations for the digits 0-9:

ch=0   t=5
sh=1   cfh=6
f=2    cph=7
p=3    ckh=8
k=4    cth=9

logic behind this scheme is:
ch # of vertical strokes=0
sh 1 upper stroke
gallows are coded like this:
loops 1 counts 0, 2 count 1
vertical strokes 1 or 2 count 2 or 4
so:
char loops strokes digit
------------------------
 f   1     1       0+2=2
 p   2     1       1+2=3
 k   1     2       0+4=4
 t   2     2       1+4=5
the surrounding c-h add 4 to the digit thus:
cfh=6,cph=7 and so on.
This is quite arbitrarly, but shows, how digits might be hidden in the text.
Cheers
CLaus

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Bruce Grant [mailto:bgrant@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Gesendet: Freitag, 14. Juni 2002 04:11
An: voynich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: VMs: Re: VMs as Numbers


The phrases "bench bits" and "almost exactly half" make me think of something.

The gallows characters really have several dichotomous features, don't they?
That is,
-    one loop vs. two loops
-    two straight legs vs. a leg and a hook
-    leg straddled by a bench or not

In addition, you have "bench + no hook + no gallows" and "bench + hook + no
gallows" characters. In other words, almost all the combinations of:

(no loops, one loop, two loops) x (no hook, hook) x (no bench, bench)

They could code decimal digits, though I would expect a more even distribution
if so.

Perhaps it would be a good idea to look at the joint distribution of these
features.

Bruce


Jorge Stolfi wrote:

>     > [Bruce Grant:] Speaking of encoded Roman numerals, a dead
>     > giveaway ought to be the presence of seven different symbols,
>     > four of which appear in multiples (I, X, C, M) and three of
>     > which do not (V, L, D), and with certain forbidden diagraph
>     > patterns:
>     >
>     > IV,VI, IX, XI, XV =>   OK   VX => not OK
>     > XL, LX, XC, CX, CL =>  OK   LC => not OK  and so on
>
> There are indeed rules of this sort that apply to the sequence
> of letters in the VMS words.  However, I haven't been able to see
> any obvious match to the patterns of standard Roman numerals.
>
> One intriguing fact is that almost exactly half of the VMS tokens have
> exactly one gallows, while the other half has none. Also, almost
> exactly half of the tokens have "bench" letters (EVA ch, sh, ee); and
> this "bench bit" seems to be independent of the "gallows bit". It is
> therefore tempting to identify those letters with the 5's of Roman
> numerals, e.g. {gallows = V, benches = L}. But then what? And why are
> there 4 different gallows, and several different benches?
>
> Perhaps the 4 gallows represent the Roman "digits" V,VI, VII, VIII,
> while the benches stand for L, LX, etc.. But then what are the EVA
> letters "a"/"o", and "e", which seem to be pre- and postfix modifiers
> for other letters?
>
>     > [Robert:] A quick thought. If the VMs is mostly encoded numbers,
>     > then there is a fairly powerful test of this hypothesis.
>     >
>     > Just as Zipf's Law predicts word frequency, so Benford's
>     > Law predicts the frequencies of the initial digits of a
>     > sequence of numbers.  In a nutshell, P(n) = log(n+1) - log(n)
>
> That law may hold for "open" number sets, where the frequency
> of a number decreases with its magnitude in the approrpiate way.
> It is unlikely to hold for "closed" number sets, such as
> telephone numbers or train times.
>
> Would it hold for a numerical code? I guess that it depends on how the
> numbers are assigned to the words.
>
> All the best,
>
> --stolfi