Re: VMs: Criteria for a successful solution

["Jan" <hurychj@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Rene,  



======= At 2004-08-16, 00:04:00 you wrote: =======

>They used to be listed on Gabriel's web site
>(currently not available), and also these criteria
>can be argued about quite a lot. I am convinced
>that a successful solution will not need a lot
>of proof or analysis - a correct solution should
>be recognizable easily.

Agreed.

>1. there should be a clearly described procedure
>   how the MS text was generated, which could have
>   been performed by someone from the proposed
>   time of origin, and is reproducible. 

Well, if we are talking about somebody  ingenious, he might have had a new method, not 
yet used in his time ( if the solution really fits,  that criterion should prevail). By the same token, we would have to discard Einstein theory, because he was the first :-).  But I agrre that most likely, the 
author used the known methods ( but again, how about that uknown script?)
>
>1a. It should work for the whole Ms, not just a 
>   small part.

It may be that there are several methods used for different sections (keys, etc.) so it may not work all over.

>1b. It should work for the labels, and translate 
>   to meaningful label words.

Right - provided the labels are meaningful  :-).

>2. the 'odd features' of the MS text, as first 
>   pointed out by Currier, and extended in the
>   mean time by later analysis, should be explained
>   by the solution. In particular, it should be
>   clear how or why the word patters from the
>   core-mantle-crust or prefix-midfix-suffix
>   paradigms arise.

Right, to satisfy the linguists. If however there is a cipher used, the "words" lose their 
meaning. Same with using "nulls"  in  the text.
 
>3. The 'encryption method', when applied to 
>   other normal texts of the proposed time period
>   and language, should generate Voynich-like
>   properties.

Not necessarily -  we do not even know if the paintext was meaningfull and in which 
language. But,  if the solution si meaningfull  in certain alnguage, we may try similar texts in that language and it should work. 
 
>4. The solution should be chronologically sound.
>
>I particularly like (3), which was proposed, if
>I am not much mistaken, by Bruce Grant. It means
>that in solving the mystery, one has to concentrate
>on the 'encryption' method rather than the
>'decryption' method.

Yes, but what if it is a "trapdoor", non-reversible algorithm? Not likely, and ther should be however no 
ambiguity: the author would most probably use fully reversible system of encoding. Which brings 
another question: did author leave any clue somewhere?  If not, how did he expect he VM  be    
solved at all? Was it intended only to the group of "initiated", so there was no clue in 
the text  (or pictures)?  
 
>To make this credible, it would be required that
>other plain texts, when subjected to the same
>encryption mechanism, also give rise to such 
>features.

Right,  but that brings another point: we cannot expect 100 percent solution, based on the 
fact that some plaintext words or expressions would be obsolete, unexplainable and some 
(maybe) related to contemporary events and so on.

I would add also the most important of all, there should be minimum manipulation 
necessary with the meaning of the decoded text ( for instance for language without vowels, 
there are many options for single group of consonants). Any such manipulation leads to 
confusion and creates justified doubts about such solution.

I think such is also the flaw with all solution up-to-date,  but it seems to me however, that we 
might probably expect too much. As you said, the criteria vary if we consider the coding 
or not, etc. The undisputable criterion remains: the method should be repeatable with the 
same success by anybody who is familiar with it but does not have the  "additional 
imagination" of the solver. 

Jan




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