Dagapeyev Code Decryption
The last page of the 1939 number string
published in 1939 contained a long number code to tell the reader to solve it. It disappeared from the revised version and there was no definitive answer left.
This password is likely to be a two-stage fractionalization and transposition series, but the only answer may have been lost due to typos or omissions. The criterion for the answer is whether the same key is restored to the other sections rather than obtaining one plausible English sentence.
Prologue: Recorded Night
After the night deepens, the data was spread on the desk. The first thing that caught my eye was not the answer, but the imbalance. Some scenes were as clear as photographs and some time zones were empty as a whole. People try to capture one clear scene and explain the whole thing, but I marked the empty section first. Mysteries arise because there are many clues, but they also arise because the distance between clues is too far.
The password is followed by a long five-digit string. The author Alexander Dadafeyev reportedly replied later to the effect that he did not remember how to make it. The distribution of repeated numbers reminds us of a system that mixes fractionalization and transposition rather than simple substitution, but there is also a high possibility of typos in the original text. The code
I deliberately read the famous hypothesis at the end. First of all, when we encounter the conclusion, it seems that all objects and symbols exist for that conclusion. Therefore, the timetable, place, object, and original text were organized first, and the witness and interpretation were placed in different compartments. The novel-like atmosphere was drawn from the cold texture of the actual record, not from a made-up secret.
Case File: What I Could Believe
20313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253545556| Number | Confirmed Record | Current Reliability |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | appeared at the end of the 1939 first edition of "Codes and Ciphers". | High |
| 2 | The ciphertext was presented as a set of five-digit numbers. In the revised edition of | High |
| 3 | , this challenge was deleted. | High |
| 4 | The author is said to have failed to reconstruct the password generation method in the future. | Medium |
| 5 | There are no publicly verified plaintexts and keys. | Medium |
The encryption method, key, original text language, typographical location, and actual plain text have not been resolved.
'Unexplained' is not the same as 'supernatural', 'a huge conspiracy', and 'only this hypothesis is possible'. I didn't count the blanks as evidence.
Scene Reconstruction: Finally, the place of the certain point
was changed to the actual movement, not the stage in your head. We divided the starting point, the last check point, and the location where the item was found and calculated the minimum time required in between. When the dramatic description of later generations was removed, small and specific elements such as sound and lighting, doors and roads, paper and ink, and the spacing of symbols came forward.
The person's mind was not fixed and the action was written first. The same behavior can be caused by fear, planning, error, and fatigue. If it is a code, the same symbol can be a sound, a word, a separator, and a meaningless sign. After writing down all possible roles, he erased the roles that conflict with other records one by one.
Clue 1. The code appeared at the end of the 1939 first edition of "Codes and Cipers".
I split this sentence into three pieces first. It indicated who first checked, how close the confirmation was to the incident, and where the later interpretation was attached. Old events and codes turn into clearer stories than the original while being repeatedly cited. But clarity is not the same thing as accuracy. In my notes, I separated the direct record, the traces left by the object, and the reasoning of later generations into different colors.
This clue was then confronted with the record, "The ciphertext was presented as a five-digit number bundle." It is not a good hypothesis if one hypothesis explains only the first sentence and avoids the second sentence. In particular, if you fail to pass the question, "Is the five-digit division an actual code unit or print convenience?" the attractive explanation also lowered the score. I've seen clues that make the conclusion uncomfortable longer than clues that make the conclusion cool.
If you look at the clues this way, the case seems a little less dramatic. Instead, there is a boundary between how far it is clear and where it is imagined. That boundary is necessary to correct reasoning when new data are released. The most dangerous moment in the unwritten record is not when you make a false hypothesis, but when you turn the hypothesis into a sentence of fact.
Clue 2. The ciphertext was presented as a set of five-digit numbers.
I split this sentence into three pieces first. It indicated who first checked, how close the confirmation was to the incident, and where the later interpretation was attached. Old events and codes turn into clearer stories than the original while being repeatedly cited. But clarity is not the same thing as accuracy. In my notes, I separated the direct record, the traces left by the object, and the reasoning of later generations into different colors.
This clue was then confronted with the record, "This challenge has been deleted from the revised edition." It is not a good hypothesis if one hypothesis explains only the first sentence and avoids the second sentence. In particular, if it fails to pass the question, "What is the repetitive 81·82 series of spaces, frequencies, and coordinates?" the attractive explanation also lowered the score. I've seen clues that make the conclusion uncomfortable longer than clues that make the conclusion cool.
If you look at the clues this way, the case seems a little less dramatic. Instead, there is a boundary between how far it is clear and where it is imagined. That boundary is necessary to correct reasoning when new data are released. The most dangerous moment in the unwritten record is not when you make a false hypothesis, but when you turn the hypothesis into a sentence of fact.
Clue 3. This challenge was deleted from the revised edition.
I split this sentence into three pieces first. It indicated who first checked, how close the confirmation was to the incident, and where the later interpretation was attached. Old events and codes turn into clearer stories than the original while being repeatedly cited. But clarity is not the same thing as accuracy. In my notes, I separated the direct record, the traces left by the object, and the reasoning of later generations into different colors.
This clue was then confronted with the record, "The author is said to have failed to reconstruct the password generation method in the future." It is not a good hypothesis if one hypothesis explains only the first sentence and avoids the second sentence. In particular, if it fails to pass the question, "Can a single-digit typist destroy the entire transposition?" attractive explanations also lowered the score. I've seen clues that make the conclusion uncomfortable longer than clues that make the conclusion cool.
If you look at the clues this way, the case seems a little less dramatic. Instead, there is a boundary between how far it is clear and where it is imagined. That boundary is necessary to correct reasoning when new data are released. The most dangerous moment in the unwritten record is not when you make a false hypothesis, but when you turn the hypothesis into a sentence of fact.
Clue 4. The author is said to have failed to reconstruct the password generation method in the future.
I split this sentence into three pieces first. It indicated who first checked, how close the confirmation was to the incident, and where the later interpretation was attached. Old events and codes turn into clearer stories than the original while being repeatedly cited. But clarity is not the same thing as accuracy. In my notes, I separated the direct record, the traces left by the object, and the reasoning of later generations into different colors.
This clue was then confronted with the record, "There are no publicly verified plaintexts and keys." It is not a good hypothesis if one hypothesis explains only the first sentence and avoids the second sentence. In particular, if you fail to pass the question, "Is the five-digit division an actual code unit or print convenience?" the attractive explanation also lowered the score. I've seen clues that make the conclusion uncomfortable longer than clues that make the conclusion cool.
If you look at the clues this way, the case seems a little less dramatic. Instead, there is a boundary between how far it is clear and where it is imagined. That boundary is necessary to correct reasoning when new data are released. The most dangerous moment in the unwritten record is not when you make a false hypothesis, but when you turn the hypothesis into a sentence of fact.
Clue 5. There are no publicly verified plaintexts and keys.
I split this sentence into three pieces first. It indicated who first checked, how close the confirmation was to the incident, and where the later interpretation was attached. Old events and codes turn into clearer stories than the original while being repeatedly cited. But clarity is not the same thing as accuracy. In my notes, I separated the direct record, the traces left by the object, and the reasoning of later generations into different colors.
This clue was then matched with the record, "The password was published at the end of the 1939 first edition of "Codes and Cipers". It is not a good hypothesis if one hypothesis explains only the first sentence and avoids the second sentence. In particular, if it fails to pass the question, "What is the repetitive 81·82 series of spaces, frequencies, and coordinates?" the attractive explanation also lowered the score. I've seen clues that make the conclusion uncomfortable longer than clues that make the conclusion cool.
If you look at the clues this way, the case seems a little less dramatic. Instead, there is a boundary between how far it is clear and where it is imagined. That boundary is necessary to correct reasoning when new data are released. The most dangerous moment in the unwritten record is not when you make a false hypothesis, but when you turn the hypothesis into a sentence of fact.
Put three hypotheses on the same scale The
hypothesis was not evaluated as a cool sentence. The number of clues to be explained, the number of newly requested assumptions, and the degree to which they endure the opposite evidence were written, respectively. Even if one clue is fully explained, it is not a good hypothesis if the other records have to be discarded.
Hypothesis A. It is a two-step password that is repositioned after changing the character to a coordinate number.
This description was published at the end of the 1939 first edition of "Codes and Ciphers".It has the advantage of accepting " as a relatively small assumption. I assumed that this hypothesis was correct and walked time and space all over again. Each time people, objects, and symbols moved to the next location, they wrote down the actions and times they needed. There must have been a hidden assumption at the point where the sentence was cut off.
The biggest weakness is that it does not fully explain "this challenge has been deleted from the revised edition." If you keep adding accomplices, coincidences, and lost things to keep the hypothesis alive, you can explain anything. However, such an explanation does not predict new clues. I only scored when two independent records pointed in the same direction, and I scored every time I called in a new exception.
117100118So, whether or not to adopt this hypothesis as a conclusion was judged not by atmosphere but by cost. The number of clues to be explained, the number of newly requested households, and the degree to which they endure evidence against them are listed in the same table. Novel scenes were used to show the texture of facts, but not as evidence to fill in the blanks.
119101120Hypothesis B. modified the method introduced in the book, but more than one number was wrong during the printing process.
121102122This explanation has the advantage of accepting as a relatively small assumption that "crypto statements are presented as a set of five-digit numbers." I assumed that this hypothesis was correct and walked time and space all over again. Each time people, objects, and symbols moved to the next location, they wrote down the actions and times they needed. There must have been a hidden assumption at the point where the sentence was cut off.
123103124The biggest weakness is that it does not fully explain "the author is said to have failed to reconstruct the password generation method in the future." If you keep adding accomplices, coincidences, and lost things to keep the hypothesis alive, you can explain anything. However, such an explanation does not predict new clues. I only scored when two independent records pointed in the same direction, and I scored every time I called in a new exception.
125104126So, whether or not to adopt this hypothesis as a conclusion was judged not by atmosphere but by cost. The number of clues to be explained, the number of newly requested households, and the degree to which they endure evidence against them are listed in the same table. Novel scenes were used to show the texture of facts, but not as evidence to fill in the blanks.
127105128Hypothesis C. It is a challenge or prank that has deliberately made there is no complete answer.
129106130This explanation has the advantage of accepting "this challenge has been deleted from the revised edition" as a relatively small assumption. I assumed that this hypothesis was correct and walked time and space all over again. Each time people, objects, and symbols moved to the next location, they wrote down the actions and times they needed. There must have been a hidden assumption at the point where the sentence was cut off.
131107132The biggest weakness is that it does not fully explain "publicly verified plaintext and keys do not exist." If you keep adding accomplices, coincidences, and lost things to keep the hypothesis alive, you can explain anything. However, such an explanation does not predict new clues. I only scored when two independent records pointed in the same direction, and I scored every time I called in a new exception.
133108134So, whether or not to adopt this hypothesis as a conclusion was judged not by atmosphere but by cost. The number of clues to be explained, the number of newly requested households, and the degree to which they endure evidence against them are listed in the same table. Novel scenes were used to show the texture of facts, but not as evidence to fill in the blanks.
Conclusions I abandoned
137111138When I started the investigation, I was also drawn to the most famous explanation. It organized the case into one sentence and gave intention to everything. However, in contrast to the original record, each blank required a new coincidence. I erased the conclusion then and started again. Good reasoning is not about adding anything, but about removing unnecessary assumptions.
139112140I've thrown away how to treat a bunch of numbers as a word. When the distinction was removed and counted again as one-digit, two-digit, and coordinate pairs, there were some periodicity, but they did not converge to one plaintext. The biggest problem is the lack of verifiable generative records of authors.
141113142In particular, the details repeated on later articles and the Internet were separated from the source. Just because the same sentence appears in multiple places does not mean that there are multiple independent sources. We first checked the possibility that one error was duplicated. After this process, the case became less colorful, but the weight of the remaining clues increased.
Anti-evidence: Sentence to destroy my reasoning
145116146The investigation ends quickly if I gather data that upholds my conclusion. So I put the three most uncomfortable questions next to the conclusion.
147117148- Is the five-digit division a real cryptographic unit or print convenience 150119151
- What is the repetitive 81·82 series of spaces, frequencies, and coordinates 152120153
- Can a single-digit typo destroy the entire transposition?
These questions are not decorative. It is a switch that will change its conclusion when new data comes in. The ranking of the hypotheses changes immediately when directly linked information, such as the sighting source, preserved physical evidence, comparative samples from the same author, and independent dating. On the contrary, when the word "likely" increased, the ranking did not change.
Final Reasoning: I Reached
159125160This password is likely to be a two-stage fractionalization and transposition series, but the only answer may have been lost due to typos or omissions. The criterion for the answer is whether the same key is restored to the other sections rather than obtaining one plausible English sentence.
This conclusion is not a complete final judgment. The direction calls for the fewest assumptions in the currently disclosed records and explains the most clues at the same time. It is also clear that what comes out changes the conclusion. Reliable original records, verifiable legal science data, and independent evidence directly linking people and objects are needed.
163127164I do not write that the case is closed. Instead, write down how far you can close it. That boundary is the result of this investigation. The fun of mystery is not that anything is possible. It's about finding out what you can throw away among the possible explanations.
Additional Survey Record 1. Redraw the timetable
167130168Re-expanding the data on the desk, this time covering the conclusion. "The code was published at the end of the 1939 first edition of "Codes and Cipers"."The place and the time were lined up, leaving only one behind. Unconfirmed sections were not filled by imagination but marked with blank squares. The larger the square, the lower the reliability of the hypothesis to pass through the section. On top of
169131170, I posted the explanation, "It is a two-step password that changes characters to coordinate numbers and then transposes them again." At first, everything seemed to be right, but when I substituted the question, "Is the five-digit division a real cryptographic unit or print convenience?" a weak connection was revealed. Hypothesis has to endure the question. If you keep making new coincidences to avoid questions, you will create, not reasoning, from that moment on.
171132172The results obtained in this section are not confirmed criminals or complete plain texts. Instead, it became clear which explanations required fewer assumptions, and what would flip the ranking if found. Even if the case is not completed, the scope of the investigation can be narrowed. This record is intended to leave that very narrow boundary.
173133174Further investigation record 2. Disappeared link
175134176Re-expanded the data on the desk and covered the conclusion this time. The place and time continued in one line, leaving only "The ciphertext was presented as a set of five-digit numbers." Unconfirmed sections were not filled by imagination but marked with blank squares. The larger the square, the lower the reliability of the hypothesis to pass through the section.
177135178On top of it, I posted the explanation, "I modified the method introduced in the book, but more than one number was wrong during the printing process." At first, everything seemed to be right, but when the question, "What is the repetitive 81·82 series of spaces, frequencies, and coordinates?" was substituted, a weak connection was revealed. Hypothesis has to endure the question. If you keep making new coincidences to avoid questions, you will create, not reasoning, from that moment on.
179136180The results obtained in this section are not confirmed criminals or complete plain texts. Instead, it became clear which explanations required fewer assumptions, and what would flip the ranking if found. Even if the case is not completed, the scope of the investigation can be narrowed. This record is intended to leave that very narrow boundary.
181137182Further investigation record 3. The path of movement of objects
183138184Re-expanded the data on the desk and covered the conclusion this time. The place and time were continued in one line, leaving only "This challenge has been deleted from the revised edition." Unconfirmed sections were not filled by imagination but marked with blank squares. The larger the square, the lower the reliability of the hypothesis to pass through the section.
185139186On top of it, I posted the explanation, "It is a challenge or joke that intentionally made there is no complete answer." At first, everything seemed to be right, but a weak connection was revealed when the question was substituted, "Can a single-digit typo destroy the entire transposition?" Hypothesis has to endure the question. If you keep making new coincidences to avoid questions, you will create, not reasoning, from that moment on.
187140188The results obtained in this section are not confirmed criminals or complete plain texts. Instead, it became clear which explanations required fewer assumptions, and what would flip the ranking if found. Even if the case is not completed, the scope of the investigation can be narrowed. This record is intended to leave that very narrow boundary.
189141190Further Survey Record 4. Opposite Hypothesis Night
191142192Re-expanded the data on the desk and covered the conclusion this time. The author is said to have failed to reconstruct the password generation method in the future, leaving only "the author is said to have failed to reconstruct the password generation method." Unconfirmed sections were not filled by imagination but marked with blank squares. The larger the square, the lower the reliability of the hypothesis to pass through the section.
193143194, I posted the explanation, "It is a two-step password that changes characters to coordinate numbers and then transposes them again." At first, everything seemed to be right, but when I substituted the question, "Is the five-digit division a real cryptographic unit or print convenience?" a weak connection was revealed. Hypothesis has to endure the question. If you keep making new coincidences to avoid questions, you will create, not reasoning, from that moment on.
195144196The results obtained in this section are not confirmed criminals or complete plain texts. Instead, it became clear which explanations required fewer assumptions, and what would flip the ranking if found. Even if the case is not completed, the scope of the investigation can be narrowed. This record is intended to leave that very narrow boundary.
197145198Further Survey Record 5. Distance between record and memory
199146200I re-opened the material on the desk and covered the conclusion this time. "There are no publicly verified plaintexts and keys," he continued, leaving only one line of place and time. Unconfirmed sections were not filled by imagination but marked with blank squares. The larger the square, the lower the reliability of the hypothesis to pass through the section.
201147202On top of it, I posted the explanation, "I modified the method introduced in the book, but more than one number was wrong during the printing process." At first, everything seemed to be right, but when the question, "What is the repetitive 81·82 series of spaces, frequencies, and coordinates?" was substituted, a weak connection was revealed. Hypothesis has to endure the question. If you keep making new coincidences to avoid questions, you will create, not reasoning, from that moment on.
203148204The results obtained in this section are not confirmed criminals or complete plain texts. Instead, it became clear which explanations required fewer assumptions, and what would flip the ranking if found. Even if the case is not completed, the scope of the investigation can be narrowed. This record is intended to leave that very narrow boundary.
205149206Additional Survey Record 6. Range of Last Scene
207150208Re-expanding the data on the desk, this time covering the conclusion. "The code was published at the end of the 1939 first edition of "Codes and Cipers"."The place and the time were lined up, leaving only one behind. Unconfirmed sections were not filled by imagination but marked with blank squares. The larger the square, the lower the reliability of the hypothesis to pass through the section. On top of
209151210On top of it, I posted the explanation, "It is a challenge or joke that intentionally made there is no complete answer." At first, everything seemed to be right, but a weak connection was revealed when the question was substituted, "Can a single-digit typo destroy the entire transposition?" Hypothesis has to endure the question. If you keep making new coincidences to avoid questions, you will create, not reasoning, from that moment on.
211152212The results obtained in this section are not confirmed criminals or complete plain texts. Instead, it became clear which explanations required fewer assumptions, and what would flip the ranking if found. Even if the case is not completed, the scope of the investigation can be narrowed. This record is intended to leave that very narrow boundary.
· The Cipher Foundation — d’Agapeyeff Cipher
216156217· Open Library — Codes and Ciphers
218157219※ This article is a commentary in the form of personal survey records based on public records and reliable data. I have distinguished between confirmed facts and my reasoning, and I update my judgment when a new official announcement is made. External material images were edited for some color and composition according to the permitted licensing conditions, and each image source was shown in the caption.