01-03-2016, 05:09 AM
In my opinion, this is a very good point.
There are several things that would disturb (or destroy) repeated patterns in the text. All of the following points would:
- irregular spelling
- errors
- whatever it is that causes the first word in each line to be different
- insertion of meaningless characters ('nulls') as suggested above
- some other degree of freedom the author had when 'translating' his plain text into the Voynich script
The first two bullets should not be expected to have such a big impact (but could be numerically tested with a simulation).
The third one is there, but should still result in a text with more short repeated sequences than we're seeing
The last two points are the interesting ones.
Trouble is: the number of possibilities is prohibitively large.
There are several things that would disturb (or destroy) repeated patterns in the text. All of the following points would:
- irregular spelling
- errors
- whatever it is that causes the first word in each line to be different
- insertion of meaningless characters ('nulls') as suggested above
- some other degree of freedom the author had when 'translating' his plain text into the Voynich script
The first two bullets should not be expected to have such a big impact (but could be numerically tested with a simulation).
The third one is there, but should still result in a text with more short repeated sequences than we're seeing
The last two points are the interesting ones.
Trouble is: the number of possibilities is prohibitively large.