05-02-2016, 11:13 AM
The amount of word variability in the Voynich is one reason i'm not convinced the text is meaningful.
A while ago i assembled the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. page to illustrate this feature of the Voynich. Level 1 lists the set of words that
differ from chedy by a single character. Level 2, by two characters. And so on.
Level 1 has 50 words. Level 2 has 361 words.
It's plausible that the author produced the text by taking a previously written word, modifying it slightly, and writing it down.
That's certainly the process i would follow in order to fill a page with text, after the first few folios because it's purely mechanical, no thought required. In fact, i probably have done this before.
I can also see Zipf's law emerging in such a text given that common words are more likely to be reused.
It's consistent with several features of the text. What are the main arguments against this theory?
A while ago i assembled the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. page to illustrate this feature of the Voynich. Level 1 lists the set of words that
differ from chedy by a single character. Level 2, by two characters. And so on.
Level 1 has 50 words. Level 2 has 361 words.
It's plausible that the author produced the text by taking a previously written word, modifying it slightly, and writing it down.
That's certainly the process i would follow in order to fill a page with text, after the first few folios because it's purely mechanical, no thought required. In fact, i probably have done this before.
I can also see Zipf's law emerging in such a text given that common words are more likely to be reused.
It's consistent with several features of the text. What are the main arguments against this theory?