So did Orffyreus hode the number 5 as John Collins is suggesting? We know that John has even based his whole theory on this finding. This means that, if I can prove Orffyreus didn't really hide the number "5", then theories on a wheel based on 5 mechanism is flawed. So, is a hidden number 5?
People have asked me so many times the following:
If you have found a code in Orffyreus papers, why don\t you just build the damn wheel?? If the code is real, it will work, if it's not, it won't work. Simple as that....
This is the whole problem with researching codes, and is the manifestation of the inner paradox itself. If I start to build what I think I have found, too early, the code cracking is not complete, and the wheel will fail to run. Then all the work is in wain, and the deciphering has been "wasted". Thus, the time I spent building a failing wheel, could be used to come closer to the correct solution. Working with codes takes great patience.
The next problem is to never let your early conclusions tell you what you are looking for! If I want to see a wheel devided into 5 parts, I will certainly "see" it. So I decided to keep working and working with an open mind. This puzzle is to wonderful to destroy by doing failed mechanical building, while great deciphering is still happening.
So to the point. If we say that this hidden 5 was just too easy to find. "5" could not be the purpose of the code. Orffyreus could simply just have drawn "Orffyreus 5", but why didn't he? No, because there must be more information occouring when he removes the tiny bit of the number 5. What more information could it now contain?
The code really say: Orffyreus 53 (or even 5x3=15)
As I have written before. At the surface, Orffyreus show us a CODE, not a machine!
I suggest that you go back and read both: