<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>How the Voynich Manuscript was created · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1407.6639/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1407.6639/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>How the Voynich Manuscript was created — mentioned by hyper_reality</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19962448</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1407.6639:19962448</guid><pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2019 17:01:10 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Of all the Voynich theories, I find those suggesting it was produced through a mechanistic method to be most persuasive. Several statistical properties of the words just don&amp;#x27;t match up with any natural languages, and there is a large amount of repetition of individual words with small variations, but hardly any repeated phrases. One recent idea is that successive words were copied from early ones, with small rearrangements of the glyphs https://arxiv.org/pdf/1407.6639.pdf . As such, the text gains the characteristic of looking like a language, when in fact it is meaningless gibberish.…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1407.6639/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CR</category></item></channel></rss>
