VMs: VMS as Hoax

[Bruce Grant <bgrant@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Nick Pelling wrote:

> > IMO, there are two pragmatic ways to "prove" that the VMs is a hoax: (1)
> > unearth provenance information that implicates it directly as part of a
> > hoaxing scheme, and (2) reconstruct the method by which it was generated.
If the VMS is a hoax, I'm not sure that the fact that it exhibits 
structure necessarily implies that it was generated in a systematic way.

Jim Reeds raised this question in a conversation we had years ago in 
college, and suggested a possible test: write a number of pages of 
random text "off the cuff" (without using a formal system), trying to 
keep the "style" consistent throughout, then use statistical tests to 
see how consistent it actually was.

Another variation of this idea might be to write a number of pages of 
Voynich-like text this way (without programs, calculations, tables, 
written notes etc. and without copying or even looking at the VMS during 
the writing), but with the intention of making it as much like the VMS 
as possible. It would be permissible to look at the VMS a few minutes 
before the test, mentally noting common words, initials and finals, the 
distribution of word lengths etc., but not taking any written notes.

Then, once the pseudo-VM text was complete, it should be analyzed for 
letter frequencies, word length distribution, common words etc. and 
compared to actual VMS text; also, comparisons should be made between 
different parts of the pseudo-VM document for consisteny..

If this test produced a close fit, it might demonstrate that a formal 
system is not necessary. (Think of it as a "Kon-Tiki" like experiment - 
though unable to prove that there was no formal system, it would at 
least make that possibility plausible.)

Bruce


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