First Layer

A closer look to the DYAHR anomaly shows another important feature. The letters DY and HR are very close together and appear to be separated from the letter A: DY A HR Maybe this is an indication of the number system used by Mr. Sanborn. D/H correspond to the base used and Y/R to the exponent, which indicates the value of the digit. The base is 10 for the decimal system and 2 for the binary system. The values of the digits correspond to 100=1, 101=10, 102=100 respectively 20=1, 21=2, 22=4 etc. But what number system did Mr. Sanborn use? Well, it can be assumed the same number system on which Dieter Binninger built his Berlin clock. BASE 5! The number 5 is a very important number in Mr. Sanborn´s work:

  • Just think of all the "E" he left in the Morse Code. "E" is the fifth letter of the alphabet.
  • When asked about the Berlin clock, Mr. Sanborn said: „You’d better delve into that particular clock.“ Based on the number 5.
  • In the same context: digital --> digetal (K0 Morse-Code word)
  • DYAHR / HYDRA has five letters.
  • Mr. Sanborn probably used an ASCII code reduced to 5 bits.
  • Shadow Filter OMBRE (1992)
  • 38°57′6.5″N 77°8′44″W ...SIX POINT FIVE...

Assuming a number system based on the number five was used, we can only represent five to the power of two letters (52=25). There are numerous encryption systems only using 25 letters (e.g. BIFID, PLAYFAIR etc.). Using this systems we have to omit 1 letter to reduce the alphabet to fit. Usually "J" or "Q". Other versions put both "I" and "J" or "V" and "U" in the same space. Here are some examples how such a reduced alphabets could look:

Letter5150 Letter5150 Letter5150 Letter5150 Letter5150 Letter5150
   A00   A00   A00   A00   A00   A00
   B01   B01   B01   B01   B01   B01
   C02   C02   C02   C02   C02   C02
   D03   D03   D03   D03   D03   D03
   E04   E04   E04   E04   E04   E04
   F10   F10   F10   F10   F10   F10
   G11   G11   G11   G11   G11   G11
   H12   H12   H12   H12   H12   H12
   I13   I13   I13   I13   I13   I13
   J14   J14   J14   J14   J14   J14
   K20   K20   K20   K20   K20   K20
   L21   L21   L21   L21   L21   L21
   M22   M22   M22   M22   M22   M22
   N23   N23   N23   N23   N23   N23
   O24   O24   O24   O24   O24   O24
   P30   P30   P30   P30   P30   P30
   Q31   Q31   Q31   Q31   Q31   Q31
   R32   R32   R32   R32   R32   R32
   S33   S33   S33   S33   S33   S33
   T34   T34   T34   T34   T34   T34
   U    U40   U40   U40   U40   U40
   V40   V    V41   V41   V41   V41
   W41   W41   W    W42   W42   W42
   X42   X42   X42   X    X43   X43
   Y43   Y43   Y43   Y43   Y    Y44
   Z44   Z44   Z44   Z44   Z44   Z

It can be assumed that the algorithm used is not known or follows not a common system. Some statements can be found about this. Mr. Sanborn says he developed his own system. What kind of system can this be? Perhaps a system based on modulo addition just like the XOR method or Caesar or Vigenere. In our case not modulo 2 or modulo 26, but modulo 5. The separation in DYAHR may indicate a modulo 5 addition of the individual digits of a letter represented in the base 5 system. For example:

We use the "missed U" alphabet
Cipher: S --> 33
Key: O --> 24

will produce:

C:33 (S)
K:24 (O)
P:02 (C)

3+2 = 5 modulo 5 is 0 (divide 5 by 5 and take the integer remainder)
3+4 = 7 modulu 5 is 2 (divide 7 by 5 and take the integer remainder)

Let's call this process deciphering. Now let's use this procedure for the first letters of K4. Note: SHPF is the result of the XOR procedure in Layer 2 and corresponds to UOXO.

  S H P F
  O B K R
  C I A X

This is interesting. What a coincidence! Or not? Let's go further:

  S H P F M D X B
  O B K R O B K R
  C I A X W E H S

After the letter H it breaks off. In addition, using OBKR twice contradicts the assumption that OBKR is independent of the rest of the message.


Let's try the same with the missed X alphabet, or should I better say the "MIST X" alphabet?

  S H P F
  O B K R
  C I A W
You can test it with all the alphabets in the table above. It always produces CIA..., but with the repeated OBKR it will always breaks off. From a cryptographer's point of view, it makes no sense to use OBKR repeatedly as a message key. Using OBKR twice contradicts the assumption that OBKR is independent of the rest of the message. It seems more likely that CIAX, for example, has something to do with the message key. The direct use of CIAX as a message key is not successful, I have already tried that. CIAX may have been edited again to serve as the message key. And now we have hundreds of different possibilities to go on, and I tried a lot of them the last years:

  • Use another XOR key in Layer 2
  • Use another alphabet or shifted alphabet within the XOR operation like SHADOWBCEFGIJKLMNPQRTUVXYZ
  • Encode the CIAX aka the message key to obtain the correct message key. For example in the same way Mr. Sanborn did it on the Cyrillic Projector but with different alphabets or methods
  • Maybe some kind of bit swapping was used within the 5 bit ASCII Code: DYAHR --> HYDRA / HYDRA --> DYAHR
  • What means SHADOW FORCES LUCID MEMORY from The Morse-Code. Maybe: The keyword SHADOW FORCES the (digetal) Memory to become LUCID?
  • ...

-->Next Page<--