RE: VMs: Re: word length counts

["GC" <glenclaston@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Nick wrote:

> I said "worst-case" because you could only comfortably tell half-spaces
> from full-spaces if you knew what the code was... and I certainly
> can't and
> don't (respectively). :-p

Review the handbooks of the 16th century on cipher (Trithemius, Vig, etc., a
long list), and you'll find precautionaries that offer added protection by
changing the stream at the end of each word, or each character, or randomly.
(The "randomly" has always scared me, to be honest.)  However, it is logical
that someone who wants to protect their data and is aware of these
precautionaries would choose the word as the smallest contiguous unit based
on this advice, no matter what system is employed in encryption.  (The very
suggestion that a system change should be at the end of a word is evidence
that spaces were still commonly employed as word delineators at this time, a
time period far beyond your calculation of VMS origin.)  For me to summon up
Vig as an example is to place the VMS in a light that is too modern for its
origins - Vig compared to Trithemius was modern, with a difference of only
about 60 years.  If I'm correct then the VMS is post-Trithemius but pre-Vig,
but by your assessment the VMS is pre-Trithemius AND pre-Vig - Alberti range
of understanding.  That's a precarious position to be in, my friend, and my
hat is off to you in holding that ground as well as you do.

I do have evidence that the half-spaces are not what they seem to be.
Putting that evidence forth at this very moment would get me thronged back
to my cave, but it is becoming more and more a belief on my part.  The
question is whether this is a consistent feature, or one that relates to the
early herbal pages alone.  The later pages make less use of half-spaces,
have a larger "vocabulary", and have all the earmarks of someone who is
quite conversant with the system at hand, an history of development and use?

> FWIW, I think it's more than an accessorised monoalphabetic cipher - but
> less than a full-on polyalpha. I think Strong was right in terms of
> complexity and technique - but not of detail. :-o

My general inclination has been to say "screw you people" when it comes to
my personal research.  Our friend Matt however, has managed to alter my
perception by the simple act of demonstrating a genuine interest in my
findings.  He asked a few questions of interest, and I found myself in the
position of lacking documentation sufficient to his request.  No one has
asked in five years, so I was somewhat shocked into realizing that I've
failed to maintain a proper record.  I'm still out on the hook as far as
answering Matt's simple questions in mathematical detail, and I'm somewhat
embarassed over the whole affair.

To that end I've created the page
http://www.voynich.info/vgbt/Strong_files/, which for now has only
background documentation attached.  I'm working on the long history, and
have divided it into chapters so I can make things apparent in the order
they belong.

The first chapter chews Strong's decipherment into pieces, offering
commentary on all the input from others, with a few doubts of my own
expressed in the process.  Examples - Paprika entered the English vocabulary
in 1875, but is here expressed in Strong.  Sunflower entered the vocabulary
in 1595, but is here expressed in Strong.  Fifteen words of questionable
origin and spelling, obviously crib words in some cases.  In this soon-to-be
published chapter, I've gone so far as to anticipate problems and address
these up front.

After we get past the problems in language, I'm going to go into the system
itself, as described by Strong.  How did he reach the conclusion that the Y
string was 1-3-5-7-9-7-5-3-1-4-7-4?  That's the easy part.  Take the O'Neill
and Feely cribs, and work it out.  Throw in a few labels from Newbold's
plates, and the sequence emerges on its own.  I'm going to be very kind to
Strong on this identification, just so you won't be left in suspense.  This
demonstrates a superior mathematical intuitiveness on his part, and deserves
high praise.

Then we have to meddle in the most difficult part of the process, and that
is his transcription itself.  None of us agrees with his transcription, and
herein lies the problem.  Even with his cribbed decipherment, I can
demonstrate where the transcription/decipherment falters by simple analysis,
and offer corrections to this problem.  In most cases I can correct his
transcription to the point that the decipherment itself can be corrected and
brought back in line.

But here again, even with these corrections, we're only dealing with two
pages, which means we have a very limited amount of the system available for
analysis, and at this point only enough to bring a few paragraphs of related
pages into view.  Where do we go from here?  The pizza parlor, my friend,
the pizza parlor.  Not a take-out affair, but a sit-down, burn the roof of
your mouth kind of affair.  Deep dish, plenty of anise in the sauce, hot
cheese and spicy meat.  And plenty of photographs, yes, that too.  We'll be
serving crow as a side dish for stragglers, and I want plenty of pictures of
this event.

GC

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