Re: VMs: Can one "prove" a hoax? - and a request.

[Gordon Rugg <g.rugg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Proving a hoax? Interesting question?.

I?d like to modify the question, and ask what we would consider as criteria for a
successful solution, regardless of whether that solution is a hoax or a
decipherment. My suggestion is that a successful solution would
1: account for all of the unusual features of the VMS (high degree of repetition,
the line as a discrete unit, etc), and
2: be feasible using the methods, materials and knowledge available at the time
when the VMS was produced. Different solutions would propose different times of
production (e.g. a hoax by Kelly versus a genuine fifteenth century code).
3: if the solution is a decipherment, then it should satisfy the above criteria,
and also produce the same results if used independently by two or more people.

Ideally, the solution would also account for the unusual features of the VMS as
inherent parts of that solution, rather than as ?bolt-on? explanations of each
feature separately.

Actually proving a hoax, as opposed to proving a hoax is possible, is a tricky
proposition. For instance, a very verbose Trithemian cipher might be almost
impossible to distinguish from a hoax, if the padding text was produced using a
method which could also be used to generate a hoax. In that case, we?d need to
invoke the principle of parsimony, and say that the hoax would be the most
economical explanation which accounted for all the facts.

Best wishes,

Gordon

______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list