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

*To*: nick pelling <incoming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>*Subject*: Re: VMs: Conclusions - Algorithm?*From*: steve ekwall <ekwall2@xxxxxxxx>*Date*: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 07:51:50 -0600 (MDT)*Cc*: vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx*In-reply-to*: <5.2.1.1.0.20030622160134.034442d0@pop3.blueyonder.co.uk>*Reply-to*: vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx*Sender*: owner-vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx

FWIW? Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 16:07:57 +0100 From: Nick Pelling <incoming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Reply-To: vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx To: vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: VMs: Conclusions - Algorithm? Hi Vladimir, >So, there are 4 possibilities >(1) HIGH USABILITY. The cipher is simple to encode and to decode. Then, >after a short training the VMS "language" is >simple readable and writable whithout intermedial step of "coding". >(2) HIGH SECRET. The author was very afraid (of church, authorities etc.) >and done the cipher VERY deep - encoding and decoding takes MANY steps, > the text is not directla readable/writable after a training. >(3) CIPHERING MANIA. The author wanted to make encoding-decoding as >complex as possible. >(4) TRICK. The author wanted to sell the book as expensive as possible, >and used the deep ciphering as a marketing trick. > >Here I want to deny the possibility 2 (HIGH FEAR)- The kind of pictures is >so, that the author can be punished only for pictures and diagrams. >If he wanted to make real secret of what this book about - he should >never make pictures with naked women and stars and fantastical plants. > >Then I also want to deny the possibility 3 (CIPHERING MANIA)- >In this case he should be aware of decipherung technology of his time and >make the cipher impossibly deep. Then we have no chance at all -- the >method can be very complex, and more, >the text must have a lot of errors because of algorithm complicity- > >So, in only one case we can discuss something - if the encoding is >relative simple and the text is readable. Given the (computational) complexity of modern codes breakable via computer, I take a more optimistic view than this - if we can determine the correct basis for the coding system (ie, the grouping level at which semantic information is held, etc), then we can probably break the code systematically. The first step, then, is to unhide the cipher language - we can worry about the difficulties of breaking it afterwards. So, all my suggestions about paired ciphers relate to unhiding the code, rather than to breaking that code. FWIW, I don't believe I'll be the one to break the code, but I might just be the one to unhide it... fingers crossed! :-) Cheers, .....Nick Pelling..... ______________________________________________________________________ Hi Nick and ALL :-) I hope you're the 1 to unhide it too! Just a few nights ago (6/20 (oh noo another 20!)) (yikers - but it was NOT ES?) - I was awoken from a sleep here, that I said I had to write this down (I did - but it makes no sense to me - sorry) :-/ My ~worst subject of all is math (ArrGGgggg - I HATE it (ha.haa)) I do know about variables from programming 8080/Z80 assembly code on my old osborne computer and also know an equation should ~balance out~ Mentally, after reading about the construction of CPU & MEMORY Chips (computer hardware guts) I could easily relate!, and always KNEW you cannot go to that section of the Chip until you return from where you came from etc (to make jump) - unless it's written in code as JMP or SWP etc. (unless you grounded out the (ground) pin. Technically (mechanical/electrical FLOW) I GOT IT !! - MATH I ~suck at~ (ha.haa) (sigh) :-/ (but IT IS SIMPLER THAN I THINK (per ES!!) (smiles):-) (I'm sure I will have some parenthese in the _wrong_ place (sigh)) Thus my problem here - THIS (below): "A (very sad) Voynich (mathmatical) equation attempt to DECODE/ENCODE per the FOLD & FLIP (ES 3 3 9)" ~PROBLEM~ is, I can only make this _balance out_ if I end it with "'equation goes to' X=VMS(character solution)" But there are too many "X's" so I just wrote down "=>VMS" See other char's below. ANYWAY (and I can fax you the page if you like - as ascci requires I change some of my (original dream) characters here.) IF you let: " " space equal space; Nx equal 1 of (4 of 8) gallows; xN equal the other 1/2 (4 of 8) gallows; + equals the continuation until next "Nx" or "xN"; n equals lower case vms stanalone char's (non gallows) nx " " " unkown number >7? (greater than 7?) [<se> more funny shapes <se>] "scripty F" = "%" equals FOLDING/FLIPPING of key % until encounter of Nx "script n\x" = "#" equals lower case (nx) actually looks a medical Rx but is "n"\x --------------------------------------------- THEN: --------------------------------------------- 1) Nx(1)nx%(then Nx=Xn)% 2) Nx(2)nx%(then Nx=Xn)% 3-8) etc.. --------------- #=(abcdefgh) 1 of 2 lower characters xN+(abcdefgh)=xN+# (*) <- actual STAR <se> xN(+abcdefgh) --------------- <- over line or divided by? =>VMS Nx(+abcdefgh) xN(+abcdefgh) --------------- <- over line or divided by? =>VMS Nx(+hgfedcba) mirror? A B A C D-D C---C D B A B [above mirror is tabbed & spaced using pine editor] (se) those diamond shapes (above) should look like <>-<>---<> <se HOPE THAT HELPS to unhide IT... I hear there are MATH wiZZards that can equation a fart? I'm NOT that one there (just 1 of 12) ha.haa)> again - I don't know what any of the above means, and personally since awaking having to find PEN (not pencil) and PAPER I feel sure I forgot a lot. (sorry) Best to you & yours there -=se=- steve (FOLD IT, fLiP IT) ekwall :-) PS IT's simpler than you think! (se/ES) :-) ______________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying: unsubscribe vms-list

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: VMs: Conclusions - Algorithm? Oops :-(***From:*steve ekwall

**References**:**Re: VMs: Conclusions - Algorithm?***From:*Nick Pelling

- Prev by Date:
**Re: VMs: RE: Map scans now posted...** - Next by Date:
**Re: VMs: Conclusions - Algorithm? Oops :-(** - Previous by thread:
**Re: VMs: Conclusions - Algorithm?** - Next by thread:
**Re: VMs: Conclusions - Algorithm? Oops :-(** - Index(es):