Login

dashstofsk · (This post was last modified: 25-06-2025, 04:48 PM by dashstofsk.)

(25-06-2025, 03:04 PM)oshfdk wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think no matter what algorithm one can propose for randomly generating a lot of pseudo text, it's probably quite trivial to adapt this mechanism for actual encoding, just by adding a bit of constraints on the randomness

I must profess to being largely ignorant about complex cypher algorithms. I can understand why an item of correspondence might need to be encoded so that no third person would be able to read it. Such a correspondence would need to be decyphered only once and read only once. But I cannot understand why a manuscript of this size should need anything similar. If it is intended to be a reference manual for its owner then it will just be too awkward to have to decypher at each reading.

(25-06-2025, 03:04 PM)oshfdk wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think it makes sense to test how this would work for non-European languages

I don't think the word-splitting and matrix method would work on normal languages, European or non-European. It works on the VMS because of the curious property of the gallows characters. Gallows words make up about half of the words in the VMS and the majority are k t words. Most of these are placed mid-word and my tables show that they can split words into two independent parts. The words appearing in the matrices make up 30% of all the language B words. No other character in the VMS is able to do anything similar. And this is evidence of artificial construction.

Also I don't know much about non-European languages. I will have to leave it to other people to try this method on those languages.