  This paper discusses the application of known techniques, knowledge and
technology in a novel way for encryption. Two distinct and separate methods are
presented.
  Method 1: Alter the symbol set of the language by adding additional redundant
symbols for frequent symbols. This will reduce the high frequency of more
commonly used symbols. Hence, frequency analysis upon ciphertext will not be
possible. Hence, decryption will be possible.
  Method 2: Computers use binary base 2. Most encryption systems use ciphering
to convert data to ciphertext. The author presents the theory and several
possible implementations of a method for computers analogous to speaking
another language. This is done by using a binary base other than base 2. Ex.
Fibonacci, Phi or Prime.
  In addition, steganography may be used for creating alternate binary bases.
  This kind of encryption significantly increases the complexity of decryption.
First the binary base must be known. Only then, can decryption begin.
  This kind of encryption also breaks the transitivity of
plaintext-codebook-binary; the correlation of letters-ASCII-base2. With this
transitivity broken, decryption is logically impossible. Coupled with
encrypting the plaintext, binary encryption makes decryption uncrackable. It
may produce false positives--information theoretic secure, and requires much
more computing power to resolve than is currently used in brute force
decryption. Hence, the assertion that these combination of methods are
computationally secure--impervious to brute force.
  The proposed system has a drawback. It is not as compressed as a base2.
(Similar to adding random padding to the encryption.) However, this is
acceptable, since the goal is very strong encryption:
  Both methods are not decryptable by method uncrackable - by conventional,
statistical means.
