Re: Cryptomania
 

Yep, a nibble (great word :biggrin:!) - based on the idea that hex is, in a way, used as 'shorthand' for binary codes.

Re: Cryptomania
 

That's right - I was looking out for nibbles already. At least 3 (A, C and D) of your crypt letters are nice candidates, but the others (I, K, L and O) are not :depressed
Bet your encryption method is rather straightforward, while decryption is not that obvious, at least for me...
Earlier you told of another (intermediate) grid you've got; did it consist of 81 elements too?

Re: Cryptomania
 

It's actually very straightforward, don't look too far ;). Perhaps if I remind you of what I said before, that in addition to A, C, D, I, K, L and O you could also have seen other letters, but not every letter?

The next step is not really a grid, but as you have to make breaks because of the Nord software (max 40 characters, I think) anyway, you might as well make the breaks look good.

Re: Cryptomania
 

I've read about hex, nibbles and binary, unfortunately the wiki pages were written in Chinese :rolleyes:
Looking at the chart hex-dec-oct I've noticed the highest decimal number for a hex digit is 15, and the highest letter you used is the 15th one, i.e: "O" Is that relevant? Does it have anything to do with the encryption? Or, better: Does it make any sense at all?

Re: Cryptomania
 

:arms:! Now the next step is easy.....

Re: Cryptomania
 

... highest letter ... O ... 15th ... 1111 ...
... was pretty much the first thing I noticed; not that it lightened my mental gloom too much. By the way, being nicely within the range [0001...1111] was also the very reason for replacing the letters with their binary (4-digit) representations. But this was obviously the wrong way to Tipperary.

Either my neurons are still in a coma or I'm totally overthinking this :lol:

Re: Cryptomania
 

You could also have shared it... :frown: So I've wasted my time trying to discover something you already knew from the very beginning... Why do I have only two neurons? :sobbing:

Re: Cryptomania
 

Guess so, as there is a much simpler way of doing what you set out to do ;)

[edit] Actually, on reviewing your older post, I thought you went wrong because "using the lowest 4 digits of the ASCII/position values" - not something I recognised as having done in constructing the code ;) - wasn't the way to go. Probably still true, but now I think it might also be because of another 'mistake' you made - which goes back to an earlier discussion we had :biggrin:!

Re: Cryptomania
 

... a much simpler way ...
Well, one could write the numbers in decimal,
15 3 11 9 9 1 15 15 9
9 12 11 4 12 9 12 9 15
9 11 9 1 12 12 9 15 ...
but then it's not exactly 4-digit-related any more.
Or write them in hex (implies 4 bin digits),
f 3 b 9 9 1 f f 9
9 c b 4 c 9 c 9 f
9 b 9 1 c c 9 f ...
but this led me to nowhere.

... an earlier discussion we had ...
You mean the A=1 vs A=0 mapping dispute? :cool5:
Either way, I also tried the index based numbers
(here's the bin version:
1110 0100 1010 1000 1000 0000 1110 1110 1000
1000 1100 1010 0011 1011 1000 1011 1000 1110
1000 1010 1000 0000 1011 1011 1000 1110 1110 ...)
and couldn't find relevant mathematical/visual patterns.

Re: Cryptomania
 

That's the one :arms:

Now what to make of the second clue?