Missing Papyrus

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Edit typo's

Who is "Edit"?

Lol, I should not be the one giving out a critique of the English language.

[Theseus]

Who is "Edit"?

Lol, I should not be the one giving out a critique of the English language.

I don't get it.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I don't get it.

An apostrophe denotes ownership. They are also used to join two words together such as "can" and "not" to form "can't".

So you put "Edit typo's". Hence "who is Edit", s/he apparently owns some typos? It should be "Edit typos".

Like I said, I should not be critiquing someones English as I am horrible and make many offenses in a day.

[Theseus]

An apostrophe denotes ownership. They are also used to join two words together such as "can" and "not" to form "can't".

So you put "Edit typo's". Hence "who is Edit", s/he apparently owns some typos? It should be "Edit typos".

Like I said, I should not be critiquing someones English as I am horrible and make many offenses in a day.

Ah. I see. I'm a health professional and I think I was in clinical note making mode when I typed that. Whenever I write abbreviations in the plural I throw in an apostrophe (such as "tx's" or "RCT's"). Since "typo" is an abbreviation for "typographical error" I instinctively threw in the apostrophe. Thanks for pointing it out, even though your joke failed, LOL. Your joke would have made more sense if I had said, "Edit's typo".

Theseus

[jskains]

That seems like a theory that goes out of its way to come to a predetermined conclusion, but everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Yes, I believe the LDS Church to be the most correct Church on Earth, and I belief Joseph Smith to be God's Prophet. I received that through spiritual revelation, visions, and several direct signs from God.

Where does the Facsimile #1 fall in your theory?

I think it is similar to the real BoA #1, but isn't the real one itself.

To me, it appears as plain as day that since it was included in the canonized Book of Abraham, Joseph Smith thought that it truly was part of the Book of Abraham. And we can see today that it is connected to text that is clearly not the BoA.

In the cannon of the Bible, bats are referred to as birds, but does that mean the point is lost? I don't believe that absolute perfection is required.

JMS

[Mortal Man]

1. The Book of Abraham refers to the "Joseph Smith Papyrus I" in BoA 1:12 "and that you may have a knowledge of this altar, I will refer you to the representation at the commencement of this record." So we know that JSP I was used in the translation.

Abraham 1:5-20 is an extended description of Facsimile 1.

[Mortal Man]

All of which is interesting, however you don't have enough of a sample to eliminate the possibility of the damage being of n=2 type.

Yes we do.

JSP I + XI is ~35 cm long and JSP X is ~30 cm long; hence, there is more than enough papyrus available in both continuous segments to shift the edge curves by more than two windings.

And doing the experiment as you propose wouldn't address this issue.

I'm sure that nothing I could do would change your determination to persist in certain beliefs despite the evidence. If you want the truth, you have to look at the evidence for yourself.

I suggest that you do the experiment and inflict n=2 type damage, then remove only enough of a sample to be equivalent to the sample of papyrus your paper considered.

I am convinced that an honest, open minded evaluation of the results of this experiment would result in the consideration of the possibility of n=2 type of damage.

You're free to take our data and perform the analysis for yourself. Simply compute the correlation function for the entire range of each continuous segment. You can do this for the top and bottom of I+XI and the top and bottom of X. This will give you four independent tests of your hypothesis. If you are correct, then the correlation value for the top edge of I+XI will exhibit a peak greater than 0.91 at a shifting distance of ~20.8 cm. Similarly, for the other three sections, if the correlation peaks exhibit stronger peaks at double the winding distance, then you will have virtually proven your theory.

As Baden Powell used to say, "Never do anything for a boy that he can do for himself."

[Mortal Man]

I guess you missed the thread in the pundits forum that deals with Abr 1:12?

Hi Mola,

Conjecturing that, "I will refer you to the representation at the commencement of this record" is a later interlineal insertion in the text, hardly addresses this issue. The only way to disassociate Abraham from Facsimile 1 would be to delete verses 5-20 of chapter 1. Those verses tell the story of the vignette. Every single character in Facsimile 1 is given an important role in the narrative. Abraham, Elkenah, Libnah, Mahmackah, Korash, Pharaoh, the angel of the Lord and the bedstead all play their parts, and we are given "the fashion of them in the figures at the beginning".

MM

[Mortal Man]

Mortal Man - Do you even know when the damage was done? How do you know it wasn't damaged post Joseph Smith?

Comments like this tell me that you haven't even glanced at the paper. That makes it difficult to hold a productive conversation.

[maupayman]

I'm sure that nothing I could do would change your determination to persist in certain beliefs despite the evidence. If you want the truth, you have to look at the evidence for yourself.

He's convinced himself that he has the truth. I don't really understand the math, but what I did understand was interesting. Thanks for posting this for us to read. Just out of curiosity MM, who funds this type of research?

Oh, by the way, you have by far the creapiest avatar on this board. Who is the picture of?

[Mortal Man]

I believe he provides some evidence of the pre-Joseph damage with citations regarding the unwrapping of the papyri from their linen encasement. If he didn't, then , if I recall correctly, there is historical evidence for at least some of the damage occuring at that time. Whether this accounts for all the damage, is uncertain.

There is both "pre" and "post" damage.

Some of the regluing of "post" damage to X is illustrated below:

For a bit of "Where's Waldo" amusement, see if you can find the yellow piece in X:

[Mortal Man]

I am saying that the BoA was a separate document, not the funeral text. I am also saying it is possible that the real facsimiles were lost, perhaps damaged beyond repair. That someone crammed them in with the funeral text. That Joseph Smith translated the BoA, then tried to decipher the Funeral text, trying to figure out that THAT document said by comparing characters on the BoA portion of the scrolls with the current version of those scrolls. Ultimately Joseph Smith possibly did not know where the BoA text ended and the current text began.

And people say our paper is complicated.

[Mortal Man]

I don't really understand the math, but what I did understand was interesting.

I'm glad you liked it maupayman. Figure 27 is one of the most interesting parts to me. It explains why calculations in the past have been off.

Just out of curiosity MM, who funds this type of research?

Chris and I funded this research entirely out of our own pockets. It has consumed much of my spare time.

Oh, by the way, you have by far the creapiest avatar on this board. Who is the picture of?

Il est moi. My shroud conceals me from the fiery glare of the SCMC.

[maupayman]

Chris and I funded this research entirely out of our own pockets. It has consumed much of my spare time.

Wow, what about this subject drove you to do this work? What is your background in this field?

Il est moi. My shroud conceals me from the fiery glare of the SCMC.

lol, ok what is the SCMC?

[jskains]

LOL, Mortal Man. I love how you tell the audience "This is pre-damage and this is post-damage" and the audience is just supposed to accept it because you have cute colorful graphs and outlines.

This is one of the most agenda driven papers I have ever come across.

JMS

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Ah. I see. I'm a health professional and I think I was in clinical note making mode when I typed that. Whenever I write abbreviations in the plural I throw in an apostrophe (such as "tx's" or "RCT's"). Since "typo" is an abbreviation for "typographical error" I instinctively threw in the apostrophe. Thanks for pointing it out, even though your joke failed, LOL. Your joke would have made more sense if I had said, "Edit's typo".

Theseus

Yes, my joke did fail. Not all of my jokes are funny. Yes Edit's typo would have been funnier. Any way carry on.

[Vance]

Yes we do.

JSP I + XI is ~35 cm long and JSP X is ~30 cm long; hence, there is more than enough papyrus available in both continuous segments to shift the edge curves by more than two windings.

That sounds a bit circular. 1) we have two windings therefore we know that the damage is type n=1, 2) Because the damage is type n=1, we know we have two windings. Round and round we go.

I'm sure that nothing I could do would change your determination to persist in certain beliefs despite the evidence. If you want the truth, you have to look at the evidence for yourself.

Psychological projection?

I told you that I did look at the evidence, but only cursory. You are so much on the defense here, that it makes me wonder about your open mindedness.

Have I claimed that type n=1 damage is NOT possible? No! I haven't!!!

Have I even claimed that type n=2 damage is more probable than type n=1? No! I haven't.

The only thing I have been claiming is that type n=2 is POSSIBLE!!!

And rather than consider that possibility with an open mind, you have done nothing but defend type n=1.

You're free to take our data and perform the analysis for yourself. Simply compute the correlation function for the entire range of each continuous segment. You can do this for the top and bottom of I+XI and the top and bottom of X.

Can correlation functions eliminate possibilities? (I doubt it.) Or can they only address probabilities? (This I could see.)

This will give you four independent tests of your hypothesis. If you are correct, then the correlation value for the top edge of I+XI will exhibit a peak greater than 0.91 at a shifting distance of ~20.8 cm. Similarly, for the other three sections, if the correlation peaks exhibit stronger peaks at double the winding distance, then you will have virtually proven your theory.

"proven" my theory? As if this type of analysis can "prove" anything. Like statistics, all it can do is provide probabilities and perhaps (maybe) confidence values.

The problem here is that the burden of proof is not mine, but yours.

1) It is obvious that you did not even consider the possibility of type n=2 damage.

2) And when this flaw was brought to your attention, rather than actually consider it, you said, hey, look at the n=1 stuff, do some n=1 tests.

I guarantee that I could produce type n=1, n=2 (and even n=3) samples for consideration that you would not be able to distinguish between, if I were so inclined.

As Baden Powell used to say, "Never do anything for a boy that he can do for himself."

Yeah, so why am I the one trying to pry open your closed mind?

[SeattleGrunge]

Ah. I see. I'm a health professional and I think I was in clinical note making mode when I typed that. Whenever I write abbreviations in the plural I throw in an apostrophe (such as "tx's" or "RCT's"). Since "typo" is an abbreviation for "typographical error" I instinctively threw in the apostrophe. Thanks for pointing it out, even though your joke failed, LOL. Your joke would have made more sense if I had said, "Edit's typo".

Theseus

You gave yourself away w/ "RCT's." Now I know your profession and I won't have any trust in anything you say anymore

[Mortal Man]

Wow, what about this subject drove you to do this work?

I first became interested in it when I read John Gee's claim of 41 feet of missing papyrus. For decades, it has been unquestioningly asserted that "~85% of the papyrus is missing." From a brief examination of the evidence I concluded that Gee's claims were physically impossible by a huge margin. I also realized that this problem could be readily solved by applying the proper analytical tools. Shortly after I began my analysis, I became aware that Chris Smith had recently conducted his own analysis and we formed a collaboration.

What is your background in this field?

I'm a computational physicist. For a brief sample of what I do, see here.

lol, ok what is the SCMC?

SCMC = Strengthening Church Members Committee

Daniel Peterson is one of their primary assets.

[Mortal Man]

I just noticed that FAIR has updated their wiki article on this subject.

The critical position, referred to here as the "short scroll," is that the length of the scroll was too short to reasonably contain the text of the Book of Abraham.

We set out to perform a rigorous geometrical analysis of the extant fragments, no more, no less.

Measurements taken of the actual papyri by several individuals who support the "short scroll," along with their mathematical conclusions, will be published in an upcoming paper in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought.

Why not provide a link to Dialogue as a courtesy to your readers?

Their conclusions will be examined once the article is fully published and released for citation.

We are happy to provide our data to aid in any examination of our conclusions.

An additional set of detailed measurements taken from the actual papyri which support the "long scroll," along with the supporting data, will be published at some point in the future.

We look forward to reading this future paper.

We will update this article as data from supporters of both positions as they become available.

I'm glad to see that FAIR is on top of things.

[Anijen]

I'm a computational physicist.

And Gee is a very well respected Egyptologist. I posit he is the expert in Egyptian papyri, and you, well you are an expert in hot gas.

Just my opinion but I would think Gee and Hauglid have a bit of a jump on you as far as the papyri is concerned. Now cosmos and figuring out the elevation of a mountain on Mars by its shadow I would concede you are the expert there and I would take your side.

[Mortal Man]

And Gee is a very well respected Egyptologist. I posit he is the expert in Egyptian papyri, and you, well you are an expert in hot gas.

Just my opinion but I would think Gee and Hauglid have a bit of a jump on you as far as the papyri is concerned. Now cosmos and figuring out the elevation of a mountain on Mars by its shadow I would concede you are the expert there and I would take your side.

Hi Anijen,

Why not examine the evidence for yourself and draw your own conclusions, rather than relying on the opinions of influential individuals? This is what you seem to do with the LGT.

Figuring out the length of a scroll, based on geometrical analysis, has nothing to do with Egyptology.

Best Regards,

MM

[Anijen]

Hi Anijen,

Why not examine the evidence for yourself and draw your own conclusions, rather than relying on the opinions of influential individuals? This is what you seem to do with the LGT.

Figuring out the length of a scroll, based on geometrical analysis, has nothing to do with Egyptology.

Best Regards,

MM

Good advise. I admit its a boring topic for me and although I don't have attention deficit disorder, I selectively have it when it comes to the KEP and scrolls and you know stuff your an expert in. I do apologize to you I get real snarky. You see I am a big Gee fan and I rush to his defense a lot. So I tend to get a bit acerbic when I post to you or Chris. Seriously I have regretted some of the things I have posted. I will try to be more professional.

Thank you for the compliment about the LGT. I feel I can hold my own with the Mesoamericanist hence the topic where I do most my posting. I am heading to U of Austin in a few months to pick some brains and hope to get to Mexico next summer for some in depth personal study (finances permitting). I still study the Mayan glyphs each day via internet and read a lot of the papers on them. I do okay there but the KEP well I just make snarky remarks.

I was impressed with Wills presentation.

Anijen

PS my family and I participated in the Nauvoo pageant this year so I didn't get to the sites last summer. But all is well Nauvoo is a very very very spiritual place.

[Mortal Man]

Seriously I have regretted some of the things I have posted.

As have we all.

I am heading to U of Austin in a few months to pick some brains and hope to get to Mexico next summer for some in depth personal study (finances permitting). I still study the Mayan glyphs each day via internet and read a lot of the papers on them.

Wow, I look forward to hearing about these adventures and your new findings.

PS my family and I participated in the Nauvoo pageant this year so I didn't get to the sites last summer. But all is well Nauvoo is a very very very spiritual place.

I visited the temple site there many many years ago. It is indeed a nice place.