Re: "The Book of Encyphered Names"

[pcw@access.digex.net (Peter Wayner)]

>Somebody asked me what the name "Cyphernomicon" means, another said it
>was not at all an obscure reference. And another asked if I was
>claiming that encyption is in some way "evil."
>
>I merely borrowed the name from the original "Cyphernomicon," also
>called "The Book of Encyphered Names." It came to us early this
>century via the Black Russian anarchist Peter Krypotkin, who had
>obtained his copy from Sheik Ibn al-Taz Khallikak, the Pine Barrens
>Horror.

This book can't exist because Arthur Clarke proved that the world
would end when all "Nine Billion Names of God" were listed. Of course,
 he didn't deal with the technical point of what would happen if they
were encrypted.

If the nine billion names were merely a list of all 
possible  combinations of a certain length of a certain alphabet,
then the encrypted list should be equal to the regular list if the
encryption carries the set in an arc that is one-to-one and onto itself.
I.e. automorphic. 

But I seem to remember that the monks in the list had certain rules
about the combinations of their letter. That would make it still a
very interesting question of what would happen if the 9 billion names
came out encrypted. 

If no one knew the key, then the world is still safe. But what if one
guy knows the key? What if that guy is a mute? What if he's merely
an obstreperous hermit? What if he sets out to decrypt the list for
his own personal communion with G*d? (Is my email listing the common "G*d"
bringing us one step closer to glory or one step closer to destruction?)
What if he has access to the neat Cray/SRC machine about which I
carried on so intently? 

So many questions! (?)