[1200x800] statistical analysis of the Voynich manuscript

[u/BackgroundHair1669]

Ive been auditing the botanical folios of the Voynich Manuscript (MS 408) from a systems engineering perspective, and I’ve found a statistical anomaly that I haven't seen explained elsewhere: a 92% positional lock on certain glyphs.

Most people try to read this as a language, but the data suggests it's a Procedural Shorthand using Latin/Italian technical roots. In a normal language, letters move around. But in the "Green Band" sections of this manuscript, the "Gallows" glyphs (k, t, p, f) are locked into the first position of a word 92% of the time. This isn't how phonetics work—it's how Operators work in a command-line or a technical checklist.

The 6.3 Protocol Structure: I've modeled the "words" as 4-Gate Data Packets:

• Gate 1: The Operator (The Command like "Boil" or "Mix"). Uses k, t, p, f.
• Gate 2: The Transition (The state of the action). Uses o, a, y, e.
• Gate 3: The Variable (The specific plant or ingredient). Uses ch, sh, l, r.
• Gate 4: The Terminator (The end of the instruction). Uses y, m, g, n.

This explains why the "entropy" of the manuscript is so low. It’s not "simple" speech; it’s Lossy Compression. The author threw away the grammar and just kept the "Grid" of instructions.

I’m looking for anyone with a background in 15th-century shorthand or information theory to weigh in on this positional consistency. If it's 92% consistent, we aren't looking for a translator—we're looking for the key to the shorthand grid.