Well, you can't have failed to notice the trig formulae embedded in the rebel stuff... which presumably means either that it's not all encoded or that there are complicated exemptions of some kind for whole symbols. I note that the three sets of asterisks in the rebel code seem to mark the boundaries of such symbols.
The duplicate letters in both virtually rule out the possibility of a cipher of any kind. Also, the capitalisation suggests a case-sensitive code. Ouch.
Both contain suspicious sequences with all/most characters drawn from a small set. Stuff like NPpPpttpPuPbpPptPpPpP in the Imperial code. This implies different encoding rules for different chunks in some way.
The only ray of hope in all this is that the punctuation is spaced about right to be literal...
Comments 2
The duplicate letters in both virtually rule out the possibility of a cipher of any kind. Also, the capitalisation suggests a case-sensitive code. Ouch.
Both contain suspicious sequences with all/most characters drawn from a small set. Stuff like NPpPpttpPuPbpPptPpPpP in the Imperial code. This implies different encoding rules for different chunks in some way.
The only ray of hope in all this is that the punctuation is spaced about right to be literal...
Reply
Absolutely - Likewise :2:, :pi:, :cos(1):, :5:, :0: and :i:(!) in the Imperial lines, just like *phi*, *arctan(1/2)* and *cos(1)* in the Rebel lines.
It makes me suspect that they may contain some information about how to decode each line, though I don't know if the placing is important.
There have been a couple of hints that the encoding is numerical in some way...
Reply
Leave a comment