Polybius ideas

[stiparest]

Catherwood wrote: I'd be happy to discuss the polybius in its own thread, but wanted to quickly reply here (and I cannot get the nested quote to behave for me).

astree says, "Working with a hint in the book, I was able to construct a polybius grid that gave mostly gobbledygook (as said in the nearby page), but then repeated a phrase from that nearby page."

I gave this a try a long time ago (when it was discussed on tweleve, i think) and never had any success. Page 19 has some sets with 8 units (ruining the 1-5 restriction), so I just tried page 47 again. I still got nowhere, and would love to know more about your progress. For example, what do you do with the runs where a single letter appears 3 times in a row? Does your key grid have a pattern that might have resulted from a clue?

....so I thought I'd start a thread.

I have also tried some things with pages 19 & 47 without much lunck. Too much 'gobblydegook'. I'm not convinced that the few random words or partial words fit any sort of pattern that means anything.

I will post my idea about a polybius code after I do a beta test on it...no use posting if it's just another dead end!

[ILLUMINATINPS]

I think its really cool you guys are going to this depth to pull letters with the Polybius. I read how it was used in Treasure trove and see how subtle use (like the leaf veins) could possibly spell something. The only thing I see as a brick wall is the fact that its always numbers between 1 and 5. None the less, if you believe its there, go for it. Worse case scenario is fdjkshfhsjkaksdhkhafkkdfadhkl

[stiparest]

Sept 13, 2018 11:58:18 GMT -5 ILLUMINATINPS said:

I think its really cool you guys are going to this depth to pull letters with the Polybius. I read how it was used in Treasure trove and see how subtle use (like the leaf veins) could possibly spell something. The only thing I see as a brick wall is the fact that its always numbers between 1 and 5. None the less, if you believe its there, go for it. Worse case scenario is fdjkshfhsjkaksdhkhafkkdfadhkl

Actually, it includes all 26 letters. You number 1-5 along the top grid and 1-5 along the side forming a grid - 25 boxes - and you put a letter in each box, usually I&J go in the same box to make 26 letters fit into 25 boxes. You do have to have pairs of numbers to find each letter. 1/5 would be the 1st column, 5th row; 2/3 would be 2nd column, 3rd row, etc. Variations include starting by entering a keyword into the boxes, say ISLAND, then continuing the alphabet, leaving out the letters already used - to fill in the rest of the boxes. This shifts the letters so it is difficult to solve without knowing what the keyword is.

I have been playing around with the stars - they have 5 points and 5 colors, so pairing stars would give you 5 letters per pair. The problems include knowing which stars to pair together as well as where the 'start' point is on each star would be. Also, would there be a keyword and if so, what would it be? Would it be the same for all stars, or different for each page - use the red-letter word as the keyword?

I don't know anything about how it was used in Treasure Trove.

[catherwood]

Sept 13, 2018 11:58:18 GMT -5 ILLUMINATINPS said:

...The only thing I see as a brick wall is the fact that its always numbers between 1 and 5. ...

That was my initial roadblock, thinking about each U-shaped blob as a simple substitution device, and then trying to take pairs of blobs.  With a Polybius approach, all you need is a running string of numbers -- as long as every digit is between 1 and 5 -- and then take them in pairs.  By thinking about the blobs as not a U but a sequence of changing colors, the counts can cross from one to the next. However, it becomes a tedious task of brute force after that, only slightly helped by using Excel and some formulae in cells.  Take pairs, then take pairs again by shifting the comma, apply a 5x5 key grid, try another grid, then another.  Every attempt I've tried fails to extract even a single coherent word.  I'm awaiting a reply from anyone who claims success, even partial, even if they can only share hints as to what worked for them.

[ILLUMINATINPS]

catherwood agreed. At the writing of this book, the authors did claim they werent' "tech savvy". That doesn't mean they didn't have a book of some sorts about ciphers. But like you said, polybius usually manifests itself in numbered pairs. We already know they did simple ROT1 ciphers with ACADIA as a number sub on the license plate, but beyond that level of difficulty, its anyones guess. I say focus on what you do know, that numbers play a part. So that points to the 1653 on the chest, the 1927614 on the camera, the sign post numbers etc...

The good thing though is we do have members that are willing to dig deep on more complex ciphers and no matter what the outcome, that angle can at least be accounted for.

[stiparest]

Sept 13, 2018 19:35:13 GMT -5 ILLUMINATINPS said:

catherwood agreed. At the writing of this book, the authors did claim they werent' "tech savvy". That doesn't mean they didn't have a book of some sorts about ciphers. But like you said, polybius usually manifests itself in numbered pairs. We already know they did simple ROT1 ciphers with ACADIA as a number sub on the license plate, but beyond that level of difficulty, its anyones guess. I say focus on what you do know, that numbers play a part. So that points to the 1653 on the chest, the 1927614 on the camera, the sign post numbers etc...

The good thing though is we do have members that are willing to dig deep on more complex ciphers and no matter what the outcome, that angle can at least be accounted for.

catherwood - the Clock Without a Face #11 - how cool!

 

I agree that every attempt to make a polybius grid word hasn't resulted in a single coherent word. I think I've seen some posts on tweleve where someone claims to have bits and pieces of whole words, but a polybius is difficult enough without making us piece together parts of words from different pages and different ciphers. As I said, I tired with the little "U's" as well as the stars, which seemed more promising to me initially - all 5 points and 5 colors numbered 1-5. Pair them and voila! words. But that didn't happen. So I, too am waiting for some credible evidence that a polybius was used.

[astree]

.
As said in another thread, the polybius gives mostly gobbledygook ( which she said and “we havent even spoken”,,, i guess because they communicayed via polybius, with words interspersed. Because of the hunt related use of the words, and their relation to surronding text, i dont think theyre random occurrences. One phrase was something like ... TO (something)... another was STOP. These both, combined with other info, were useful to me. let me look for my notes and can prob give enough info to get you started.

[astree]

.
I believe the authors start the puzzle fairly simply, and build. On p. 5, Fandango is looking toward the red L in "FOLLOWS". Below that, in the border, are the red rectangle groups of (3,2).

(3,2) are the Polybius co-ordinates of "L" in a standard grid. Note: I'm using rectangles in others ways, just seems they may have double-used this pair.

Will try to get to p. 47 a little later. 

astree

[astree]

.
Grid p. 47 ...

Dont use "I (burn the I, all eyes in the fIre), or combine the IJ in the standard way

Flip the grid (topsy turvy, upside down)

Z= (1,1) .... A = (5,5)

Polybius pairs, Top border

x
x
x
x
x
x
2 3
2 2
3 2
3 1
x
x
x
x

Read as (column, row) from grid

(O O S W S T) S T O P (F O U Q O)

gobbledygook STOP gobbledygook

Notes: this was Fandango's command on nearby text, and STOP looks like TOP (the top border)

I think this combines more meaningful with the rest of the polybius, and with other information.  Although, even by itself, it looks like part of a direction set.

Getting the correct grid, and working through the possiblities took quite a while, so don't want to give it all away for this border, or the others.  But most of the groundwork for p. 47 is presented.

[catherwood]

I am skeptical than any puzzle setter would take the time and make the effort to create a cipher in which they deliberately *avoid* creating words just to reveal something as small as a single 4-letter sequence embedded in a string of nonsense. This is not looking good to me. At the very least, a solve should reveal a complete message and be self-confirming that the full sequence has been correctly extracted, even if only to say "red herring".

[ILLUMINATINPS]

If I did all of that, and the only result I got was “STOP”, that’s exactly what I would do. 🤷‍♂️