Re: VMs: Faces at the roots

[Wayne Durden <wdurden@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Nick:

> As an aside to a separate post, these days I tend to tune out when people invoke Occam's Razor in their reasoning: parsimony may be virtuous, but evidence gets convictions.

Before you put me on ignore for the Occam's Razor remark let me say that in the original it was meant as a subtle joke.  I tried to say so both explicitly and by then attaching an emoticon at the end of my usage.  I too was making a remark about its recent improper use.  Subtlety, puns and sarcasm don't transfer well in emails and perhaps across cultures so I will be more explicit from now on.  For what is is worth, here is what I said originally:

"Somewhat facetiously and using an inappropriate reference to Occam's Razor (the ultimate trump) I would suggest if this was a coded message between parties, this method does not require prior transmission of a code dictionary, prior transmission or two copies of an identical Grill or alphabet wheel, etc.  All of the encoding decoding keys are self-contained.  Ergo ipso facto per Occam this MUST be the very method used!  :)"

Possibly now the joke is more obvious, but again, I will refrain from this in the future as they don't carry well.  Obviously not everyone has time to read the emails closely, although I did manage to catch your own emoticon with regard to the null/nulloes issue.

> In the absence of any confirmed decipherment or reading, I see no reason to believe that the labels do or don't contain meaning, whether teased out in reference to the drawings or not. Your presumption that they don't seems to be based (in turn) on the further presumption that they ought to be in a simple substitution cipher, whereas nothing in the rest of the VMs (nor in the 90 years of apparently failed decipherments) would seem to support this idea. Am I missing your point?

I agree that in the absence of confirmed decipherment there is no reason anyone should ACCEPT as true anyone's hypothesis.  I disagree that in the absence of confirmed decipherment one should not be free to form any hypothesis or line of attack given the presentation at hand and to explore it.  I think a suggestion of a complete suspension of disbelief whether labels do or don't contain meaning, and thus any suggestion one should not bother to explore them in context, would be ignoring a potential avenue of attack.   Many others including some of the venerable names on the list have pursued a label attack from some approach whether comparing them to zodiacal context, collecting cribs, examining their usage in body text, etc.  It is, as they say, an obvious starting point. 

I did not see a previous approach where the same labels were examined in context to the drawing across sections and thought that would be "interesting."  I am open that they may or may not relate to material they are drawn with.  To try to determine this I have looked at identical or similar labels that appear next to drawings of different subject matter.  I have posted a resource that makes it easier for others to do so now. 

I have also then looked at individual digraphs of the shortest labels in body text.  From this I have of course formed a personal probability regarding whether they are being used as natural language and a hypothesis that the labels might be a nulls table flowed therefrom.  I tried to point out in my original post that this was influenced precisely because I was reviewing historical works including Bacon and his cyphars intermixt with nulloes at the same time I was not finding contextual meaning for the same labels in drawings.  I find his bilateral/binary code interesting because if I strike out nulls per this method I am left with few characters and it is a possible way to encode meaning in a few characters.  I also found his statement that he was able to encode meaning in a quintupled amount of null characters interesting.  It might suggest an approximate information density if the VMS is encoded with some approximate ratio of necessary nulls, although there is absolutely no reason at this time to believe a ratio of 5 to 1, or a ratio of 7 times as many nulls, or even any nulls at all.  On the issue of any nulls at all, I can actually adjust my personal probability meter on the following logical proposition or assertion or what have you:  "If the VMS is a numerically encoded document, it probably contains nulls."  The reason I adjust  my probability cloud in favor of this assertion, is in agreement with a point I believe you also made.  If the digraphs represent numbers, virtually the whole text translates to numbers.  Whether they represent characters or words then, the VMS should have yielded to frequency analysis.  (Of course, possibilities abound still, the numbers could encode letters, but the text is instead of salted with null words between real words which would constrain frequency analysis - but bottom line is you have to make some judgmental guesses someone to move forward).


I felt Nick, that where even a single list member expressed interest in this idea of a label digraph null table (whether genuinely or politely) on the list, your response immediately criticized the "methodology" in a manner that is not justified.  Specifically Luis Velez commented that the point was interesting, which you quoted in your response then suggesting my "methodology" was flawed.  Here is what was said by you:

> At 01:23 25/04/2005 -0400, Luis Velez wrote:
> > [Wayne's] point is very interesting, regarding the labels/nulloes
> > hypothesis. I'd like to see what comments Nick may have, considering
> > that he has spent some time on the subject of numeric codes.
>
> Voynichese labels could be a numeric code: but as (to my eyes at least) they don't seem sufficiently different from the rest of the text, then all Voynichese would have to be a numeric code. And I haven't found any systematic evidence for that, despite looking fairly hard.
>
> As you probably already know :-), when I see everyone's favourite label "otolal", I parse it as a set of rigidly defined digraphs - "ot-ol-al" - each of which occurs with high frequency, which would seem to point to "otolal" actually expressing three tokens (and, if my guess is right, are probably all consonants). Errrm... meaning what, exactly? Well - that's the question! :-)
>
> But that's just an aside: my real point is that Wayne seems to be (a) presuming that labels function in the way he'd expect them to behave, and then (b) looking for support for that idea. Methodologically, the problem with this is that, given sufficient persistence, you can find correlative support for just about any VMs-related hypothesis you like (though somewhat superficial, that's also basically how most economics seems to work) - but as correlation isn't causation, no-one moves forward.


I would note that many of your own statements when consulted for opinion are general statements in nature, unsupported by example, but instead based upon the weight of the time you have spent making examinations.   Perhaps to some, that kind of summary is improper methodology?  For instance the following recent statement by you:

"Voynichese labels could be a numeric code: but as (to my eyes at least) they don't seem sufficiently different from the rest of the text, then all Voynichese would have to be a numeric code. And I haven't found any systematic evidence for that, despite looking fairly hard."

This is summary style without regard to how you have looked, what you have done, etc.  It tends to discourage further testing that it might be a numeric code, but there is no examples of the method or attacks used to rule in or rule out labels as numeric code...  Your opinion of course is entitled to weight to me because of the time and effort you have put in, but generally I tend to methodology that explains the attacks or approaches, and find these kinds of summary statements unsatisfying.

Hence, I also felt a tad flustered at Rene's comment regarding OT as possibly "green", not because he didn't like my particular suggestion, but because it seemed arbitrarily off the cuff.  It was a counterexample without regard to the fact that the counterexample probably didn't hold up given other usage of the digraph OT.  The point I was trying to make is that the digraphs don't appear to be used consistently in the labels and text such that they can satisfy any particular natural language element, article, subject, adj., etc.   With the exception of some Native American Indian languages, there is a population that believes Chomsky's assertion that all languages have nouns, verbs etc.  When I googled for parts of speech analysis of voynich, this too seemed to be an "interesting" line of attack which others hadn't published much about, i.e. if the text is any natural language other than a certain native American Indian purportedly kinesthesiological language, maybe one can get an inference about where the parts of speech are?  I spent a large amount of time for me checking to see if I could deduce any.  Of course, the fact that I haven't should hardly be accepted that they aren't, but that simply is how I approached the problem.  No amount of written verbosity can serve in place of a conference with face to face communication apparently.


Again, I believe a problem of this nature can be fairly attacked from many approaches.  I am not absolutely wed to any position but I find it impossible to not adjust the probability zone of possibility based on various examinations or to refrain from forming hypothesis to check against.  I wouldn't be here at all if I accepted equally the possibility that VMS is a numerically encoded "one time pad style" against some other text numbered randomly without repetition.  Of course that possibility may be so, and it will not be solved unless the pad turns up, but my leisure time has some value and if I have to completely suspended all belief as to the probability this was so until it is deciphered, I would prefer to spend my time fishing.

All groups form cliches and are susceptible to "not invented here" syndromes on occasion.  Of course when a group is constantly barraged with fantastical ideas a certain cynicism might be developed as well which one must always be on guard is not clouding the issue.

I would hate to completely lose the ear entirely of the group that has done the most work on this to date.  I don't really hope some day to "cut the mustard" as has been said and be accepted, but rather I hope to contribute an idea that those who are spending the most effort attacking the VMS which they might find helpful towards a solution.  I am being bluntly forward in this email because I hate for problems of misunderstanding to linger.  I felt the reply of Nick improperly cast aspersions on methodology that might discourage others from even exploring the idea that the labels might be a null digraph table.  I felt a "dig," as we might say here Nick,  carried over with the comment and emoticon about nulls/nulloes.  I perhaps misunderstood, but by laying it out here, I hope to clear the air.

There is a small interest in using the label digraphs as nulls and examining the results.  This too will likely be a dead end, but perhaps not.  I (or perhaps better, someone else) will post again in a week or so letting folks know how things go...  Otherwise, I will be a silent observer for a week or so again with the exception I might publish a list of characters not used in labels or relative frequencies of their usage in labels,  in answer to my own question raised earlier.  If there is a better method or an accepted clearing person to send such lists as in the 52 labels rather than include inline in email, if anyone would like to inform me of the protocol, I will adjust accordingly.

Future posts will be short, without puns, jokes, sarcasm or subtle reference.  My last subtle pun for a while is in the PS.

Wayne

PS  - I may be paranoid, but that doesn't mean they aren't out to get me.  :)