In Mikhail Bulgakov's novel "The Master and Margarita", main character- The master, in a moment of despair, burns his manuscript, only to then learn from Woland that “manuscripts do not burn.” As beautiful as this expression is, it seems so far from the truth. Nikolai Gogol at one time burned the second volume of Dead Souls, which is now forever lost to the reader. Just as the novel “The Master and Margarita” would have been lost if Bulgakov had suddenly decided to burn it. No author in the world is able to write exactly the same novel.
But there is one area human knowledge, which quite well illustrates this expression “manuscripts don’t burn” - mathematics. If Pythagoras had not existed, or if his works had not survived to this day, surely some other scientist would have deduced that very theorem. Moreover, the meaning of this theorem has not changed over time. And it will not change, despite neither new discoveries nor technical progress. Mathematics - special kind knowledge. Its truths are objective, necessary and eternal.
What is it mathematical objects and theorems, and why do we learn them in this way? Do they exist somewhere as intangible objects in enchanted gardens, waiting to be discovered? Or are they a figment of human imagination?
This question has tormented and divided scientists for centuries. It is scary to imagine that mathematical truths exist on their own. But if mathematics is a product of the imagination of individual scientists, then what to make of the fact that we all use the same mathematics? Some argue that theorems and axioms are like chess pieces, cleverly designed devices in a game of human invention. But compared to chess, mathematics is an integral part of everyone scientific theories, describing the structure of the universe.
Many mathematicians admit that they are adherents of Platonism. The greatest logician Kurt Gödel argued that mathematical concepts and theories “form an objective reality of our own, which we cannot create or change, but only feel and describe.” But if this is true, how were people able to get to this “hidden” reality?
We do not know. But one of the guesses is this: we live in a model universe created by a computer based on mathematical laws. According to this theory, some super-advanced programmer created this model universe, and we, without knowing it, are part of it. In this regard, when scientists make a discovery of any mathematical law- this means nothing more than the discovery of the mathematical code that this mysterious developer used.
Understandably, this seems unlikely. But Oxford University philosopher Nick Bostrom argues that the likelihood that we inhabit just such a universe is much higher than it might seem at first glance. If such models are theoretically possible, then, in the end, a person will create such a universe - and maybe even several. In the future, scientists are convinced, the number of such simulation universes will be greater than real worlds. Statistically speaking, there is a high probability that you and I live in a life simulation universe.
But is there any way to experimentally test this hypothesis?
Yes, such a method exists. At least, this is what researchers Silas Bean, Zohra Davoudi and Martin Savage claim in their work.
Until now, physicists continue to develop their computer simulation of the universe. So far, scientists have managed to create a very small part of it, approximately at the level atomic nucleus based on the forces of nature. They use a discrete 3D lattice to simulate a part of space, and then launch special program to see how the laws of physics will work. Thus, they can trace the movement and collision of elementary particles.
Professor Bean and his colleagues involved in the project say that these computer models are capable of generating faint but clearly distinguishable anomalies - certain types asymmetry. This is especially noticeable at high energy cosmic rays falling to the ground. This asymmetry is evidence that we are quite possibly in a model universe.
Are we ready, like Neo, for everything? famous film"The Matrix", take the red pill to find out "how deep is the rabbit hole"? Not now. These are all just hypotheses.
The hypothesis about a computer simulation of our universe was put forward in 2003 by the British philosopher Nick Bostrom, but has already received its followers in the person of Neil deGrasse Tyson and Elon Musk, who expressed that the probability of the hypothesis is almost 100%. It is based on the idea that everything that exists in our universe is the product of a simulation, like the experiments carried out by machines in the Matrix trilogy.
Simulation theory
The theory believes that, given a sufficient number of computers with large computing power, it becomes possible to simulate in detail the entire world, which will be so believable that its inhabitants will have consciousness and intelligence.
Based on these ideas, we can assume: what is stopping us from living in a computer simulation? Perhaps a more advanced civilization is conducting a similar experiment, having obtained necessary technologies, and our whole world is a simulation?
Many physicists and metaphysicians have already created convincing arguments in favor of the idea, citing various mathematical and logical anomalies. Based on these arguments, we can assume the existence of a cosmic computer model.
Mathematical refutation of the idea
However, two physicists from Oxford and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Zohar Ringel and Dmitry Kovrizhin, proved the impossibility of the existence similar theory. They published their findings in the journal Science Advances.
After simulating a quantum system, Ringel and Kovrizhin found that to simulate just a few quantum particles huge computational resources will be required, which due to the nature of quantum physics will increase exponentially with the number of simulated quanta.
To store a matrix describing the behavior of 20 spins of quantum particles, a terabyte of RAM will be required. Extrapolating this data over just a few hundred spins, we find that to create a computer with this amount of memory would require more atoms than there are total number in the Universe.
In other words, given the complexity of the quantum world we observe, it can be proven that any proposed computer simulation of the universe will fail.
Or maybe it’s a simulation after all?
On the other hand, continuing philosophical reasoning, a person will quickly come to the question: “Is it possible that more advanced civilizations did they deliberately put this complexity of the quantum world into the simulator to lead us astray?” To this Dmitry Kovrizhin answers:
This is interesting philosophical question. But it is outside the scope of physics, so I would prefer not to comment on it.
Illustration copyright Thinkstock Image caption Scientists' conversations about the unreality of our world fall on the prepared popular culture soil
The hypothesis that our Universe is a computer simulation or hologram is increasingly exciting the minds of scientists and philanthropists.
Educated humanity has never been so confident in the illusory nature of everything that is happening.
In June 2016 American entrepreneur, the creator of SpaceX and Tesla, Elon Musk, estimated the probability that the “reality” we know is the main one is “one multi-billion dollar.” “It will be even better for us if it turns out that what we accept as reality is already a simulator created by another race or people of the future,” Musk said.
In September, Bank of America warned its clients that there was a 20-50% chance they were living in the Matrix. The bank's analysts considered this hypothesis along with other signs of the future, in particular, the offensive (that is, if you believe the original hypothesis, virtual reality inside virtual reality).
A recent New Yorker story about venture capitalist Sam Altman says that in Silicon Valley, many are obsessed with the idea that we are living inside a computer simulation. Two tech billionaires allegedly followed in the footsteps of the heroes of the movie "The Matrix" and secretly funded research to rescue humanity from this simulation. The publication does not disclose their names.
Should we take this hypothesis literally?
The short answer is yes. The hypothesis assumes that the “reality” we experience is determined by only a small amount of information that we receive and that our brain is able to process. We perceive objects as solid because electromagnetic interaction, and the light we see is only a small section of the spectrum of electromagnetic waves.
Illustration copyright Getty Images Image caption Elon Musk believes that humanity will create virtual world in the future, or we are already characters in someone's simulationThe more we expand the boundaries of our own perception, the more we become convinced that the Universe consists mostly of emptiness.
Atoms are 99.999999999999% empty space. If the nucleus of a hydrogen atom was enlarged to the size of a football, its single electron would be located 23 kilometers away. Matter consisting of atoms makes up only 5% of the Universe known to us. And 68% is dark energy, about which science knows practically nothing.
In other words, our perception of reality is Tetris compared to what the Universe actually is.
What does official science say about this?
Like the heroes of a novel, trying to comprehend the author’s intention right on its pages, modern scientists - astrophysicists and quantum physicists- they are testing a hypothesis that was put forward by the philosopher Rene Descartes back in the 17th century. He suggested that "some malicious genius, very powerful and prone to deception," could make us think that there is an external to us physical world, while in fact the sky, air, earth, light, shapes and sounds are “traps set by genius.”
In 1991, writer Michael Talbot, in his book The Holographic Universe, was one of the first to suggest that the physical world is like a giant hologram. Some scientists, however, consider Talbot’s “quantum mysticism” to be pseudoscience, and those associated with it esoteric practices- quackery.
The 2006 book “Programming the Universe” by a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology received much greater recognition in the professional community. Institute of Technology Seth Lloyd. He believes that the Universe is quantum computer, which calculates itself. The book also says that to create a computer model of the Universe, humanity lacks a theory quantum gravity- one of the links in the hypothetical “theory of everything”.
Illustration copyright Fermilab Image caption "Holometer" worth 2.5 million dollars could not refute the fundamentals of the universe known to usOur world itself can be computer simulation. In 2012, a team of researchers at the University of California, San Diego, led by Russian Dmitry Kryukov, concluded that complex networks such as the Universe human brain and the Internet have the same structure and development dynamics.
This concept of world order involves a “small” problem: what will happen to the world if the computing power of the computer that created it is exhausted?
Is it possible to confirm the hypothesis experimentally?
The only such experiment was carried out by the director of the Center for Quantum Astrophysics at Fermilab in the USA, Craig Hogan. In 2011, he created a “holometer”: analysis of the behavior of light beams emanating from the laser emitters of this device helped answer at least one question - whether our world is a two-dimensional hologram.
Answer: it is not. What we observe really exists; these are not the "pixels" of advanced computer animation.
Which allows us to hope that one day our world will not freeze, as often happens with computer games.
Anyone who has watched the famous film “The Matrix” has probably asked themselves: are we living in a computer simulation of reality? Two scientists believe they have answered this question. Zohar Ringel (Hebrew University of Jerusalem) and Dmitry Kovrizhin (Kurchatov Institute) published a joint study of the problem in the latest issue scientific journal Science Advances.
Trying to solve the problem computer modeling quantum system, they came to the conclusion that such a simulation is impossible in principle. It is impossible to create a computer for it due to the physical capabilities of the Universe.
Scientists, by increasing the number of particles in the simulation, discovered that the computational resources required for the simulation did not grow linearly, but in an increasing manner. And to simulate the behavior of several hundred electrons requires a computer so powerful that it must consist of many more atoms than there are in the Universe.
Thus, it is impossible to create a computer that could simulate the world around us. This conclusion of scientists will console not so much those who doubt the reality of the Universe as theoretical physicists - after all, if it is impossible to create a computer that will simulate and analyze quantum phenomena, then their jobs will never be taken by robots, the site noted American Association promoting science, which publishes the journal Science Advances.
One in a billion
It should not be surprising that serious scientists are discussing the plot of entertainment cinema. IN theoretical physics attention is also paid to much more bizarre theories. And some of them, from the point of view of an outside observer, look like pure fantasy. One of the interpretations quantum mechanics(Everett's interpretation) suggests the existence parallel universes. And some solutions to Einstein's equations theoretically allow time travel.
- Still from the movie "The Matrix"
The scientifically based hypothesis of the simulated nature of our world was not put forward by science fiction writers. The most famous rationale for this was made by Oxford professor Nick Bostrom in his work “Proof of Simulation.”
Bostrom did not directly claim that the world around us was created using computer technology, but put forward three possible futures (Bostrom's trilemma). According to the scientist, humanity will either die out before it can reach the stage of “posthumanity” and be able to create a simulation, or, having reached this stage, will not create it, or we are already living in a computer simulation.
Bostrom's hypothesis is no longer physics, but philosophy, but the example of the discovery of Ringel and Kovrizhin shows how physical experiment philosophical conclusions can be drawn. Especially if this philosophy allows for mathematical calculations and predicts the technological progress of mankind. Therefore, not only theorists, but also practitioners are interested in the trilemma: the most famous apologist of Bostrom’s calculations is Elon Musk. In June 2016, Musk left virtually no chance " real world" Answering questions from journalists, CEO companies Tesla and SpaceX said that the probability of our world being real is one in a billion. However, Musk did not provide convincing evidence of his assertion.
- Elon Musk
- Reuters
- Brian Snyder
Ringel and Kovrizhin’s theory refutes Musk’s words and insists on the complete reality of our existence. But it is worth noting that their calculations only work if the simulation of reality is considered as a product of computer technology.
However, Bostrom suggested that the simulation does not have to be of the nature computer program, because dreams can also simulate reality.
Humanity does not yet have technologies for producing dreams, their approximate specifications unknown. This means that they may not require the computing power of the entire Universe. Therefore, it is too early to discount the likelihood of the emergence of simulation technologies.
Horrible dream
However, neither physicists nor philosophers are aware of such particulars as specific description They don’t model reality; science will have to make too many assumptions.
For now, writers and directors are coping with this. The idea of virtual reality is young, but a simple listing of books, films and computer games about it would take more than one page. At the same time, most of them are based in one way or another on fear of technology.
The most famous work This kind of movie, The Matrix, shows a bleak picture: reality is simulated to exploit humanity, to create a golden cage for it. And this is the nature of most science fiction works about simulating the world, which almost always turn into dystopia.
In British science fiction writer Harlan Ellison's eerie story "I Have No Mouth But I Want to Scream," the surviving members of humanity exist under total control a sadistic computer that models reality in order to come up with new sophisticated tortures.
The hero of "The Tunnel Under the World" by Frederik Pohl is horrified to learn that he and his whole life were created only within the framework of a model major accident in which he dies every day terrible death to be resurrected the next morning with an erased memory.
- Still from the film “Vanilla Sky”
And in the film “Vanilla Sky,” a simulation of reality is used to make sick people in a state of cryogenic freezing feel happy, although their problems remain unresolved.
Humanity is afraid of simulating reality, otherwise all these films and books would hardly be so pessimistic. So thanks to Ringel and Kovrizhin for instilling optimism for all humanity. Of course, if their research is not a distracting maneuver of the matrix.
Have you ever entertained such a thought? That the world around us can be created on a huge powerful computer and you are surrounded by human programs? Not only physics and science talk about this, but ancient philosophers also said that everything is illusory.
Seems absurd?
Then the following Matrix proofs can destroy your world to the ground. But don't worry too much. This is just a game.
Scientists are preparing to admit this fact, checking every “sign”. Be in their place today. Rate 10 signs that there is a virtual computer world around you, computer simulation of the universe.
Fact 1. REALITY runs on electricity.
Physics: What is at the smallest level? Small balls with negative charge(electrons), the flow of which is called electricity, absolutely everything is created from atoms with electrons. Matter, gases, liquids and all nonliving objects are made of atoms. That is, fundamental basis peace - Electricity in all living and nonliving things! Everything.
Technique: modern Devices, Gadgets, household and industrial machines use the same Electricity.
Anatomy: Your Brain, Heart, Senses work on Electricity ! Remember how people are revived? They use “defibrillators” that are applied to your chest and a charge of current flows directly into your heart. All connections between neurons in tissues are built on electrical impulses.
Modern implants in the brain. This would be impossible if the brain did not run on electricity.
The heart beats 3 million times in a lifetime. Each impulse is a second lived. Electrical impulse.
Fact 2. The world is an accurate mechanical watch.
To do Universe simulation predictable, you need laws.
In our world there is laws of physics , and everything is based on them. notice, that themselves we didn't create the laws . They exist, we can only describe what already exists, adhere to it, use it for our own purposes. These laws include the law of conservation of energy, Newton's laws, Ampere's, Ohm's, Faraday's laws, Bohr's postulates, the law of light propagation, the laws of thermodynamics, and the directions of electromagnetic induction.
The world is very precise, there is no place for chaos, everything is subject to formulas. This - Matrix proof?
Fact 3. The world around us is not solid .
if you SEEMS, What there are hard objects around: table, chair, floor, walls , then these are just your feelings. In fact nothing is solid . This is just an illusion. Your eyes and hands feel electric fields, which by definition are not solid. The atoms of the hand feel the atoms of the wall, and the first and second are only energy waves of different frequencies.
Explanation: Imagine computer game, where the hero walks along the corridor, the walls do not allow him to go left or right,
None of this really exists. No wall, no corridor, no walls, no hero. All this is code that is processed on the processor of your computer. What does the hero feel in the game? That there are laws he can't overcome. There are walls that he cannot break through, he walks through the tunnel without falling down. Certain laws describe his world, and he obeys them.
Doesn't remind you of anything?
We were born into our reality. There are laws that we did not create, but we obey them. There is electricity that powers everything around. And the digital world works according to formulas.
Now it is easy to explain the following anomaly, which has puzzled physicists for almost 200 years, since 1803. Read below.
What if the code?
Fact 4. Corpuscular- wave dualism.
Physics, 11th grade of secondary school.
IN 1803 Thomas Young conducted an experiment in which he showed that light behaves in two ways, as a particle and as a wave, at the same time . That is, when you observe the experiment very closely, the light behaves like fine particle , as soon as you stop observing, the light becomes wave. How to explain this? Very simply, returning to our " digital universe = computer simulation of the world"and the process of information processing by the processor.
There is such a thing in programming as simple and complex drawing of details.
When you look at the street in the game, nearby buildings, trees, pedestrians, grass and cars are drawn in great detail. As soon as you leave the street, life on it stops. What does it mean? The fact that the processor does not have to process all the building objects, trees, pedestrians, grass and cars when you are not near them. As soon as you approach again, processing goes into full force. This saves huge processor resources .
And we return to our world and the experiment “photons – particles or waves?” Watching from afar? All you see is an undefined “photon” wave. If you observe it up close, “photons” turn into “particles.” The experiment has never been solved so easily. Because 200 years ago there were no computers or similar analogies!
This also includes the “Heisenberg uncertainty principle” and “Schrodinger’s cat”. It's the same reality “rendering” effect . Like this. Scientists see that ultra-small particles behave differently than they do large objects. And this baffles them.
Experiment. 1 slit - gives 1 line of photon balls.
2 slits - give 9 lines (!!) of balls. There should be 2!
Let's take a closer look at what's going on there.
Voila! 2 slits - 2 lines on the screen. Now the "wave" has become a "particle". The paradox is solved at the expense of the observer! You just had to get close enough.
How does this manifest itself in digital technologies? Modern games are built on the principle that only what is in front of you is calculated in detail. And distant objects are always blurry.
Fact 5. DNA is the code of all living things.
DNA- Another one elegant way , as possible describe ALL living organisms . To do this, you only need 4 nucleotides: adenine "A", guanine "G", cytosine "C", and thymine "T" . Combinations of these 4 nucleotides can be infinite set, starting with code microscopic viruses, to the codes of huge multi-ton whales.
Now the million dollar question. If we take apart the DNA individual person to the basic bricks, make a copy of them, create another person, will we get an identical clone? Answer - yes, we will get it. He will differ only in character, but externally and internally he will be a copy. And if we repeat this experiment with slight modifications from each other, we will get all the inhabitants of the planet, which supposedly differ from each other by 0.0001%. Technically, all that remains is to collect the samples, study them, make copies, and you can load them back into the program. Moreover, the DNA code is too similar to the program code of any modern computer program. Isn't it obvious? You can even see when individual pieces of code are copied using the banal principle CTRL+C - CTRL+V . Look at the colored areas.
Fact 6. Fibonacci numbers
Story. In the distant medieval Europe was a mathematician Leonardo of Pisa. He was also called Fibonacci. And one day they came to him and asked what would happen if we took a couple of rabbits and put them in a cage. Each pair of rabbits makes a copy after 1 month, how many rabbits will there be in the cage after a year (12 months)? He thought and said. The answer was 233 pairs of rabbits. That is, the sequence of numbers was 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, 377, 610, 987... The next number is obtained by adding the previous two numbers. Is the story over? No.
1: 1 + 1 = 2 2: 1 + 2 = 3 3: 2 + 3 = 5 4: 3 + 5 = 8 5: 5 + 8 = 13 6: 8 + 13 = 21 7: 13 + 21 = 34 8 : 21 + 34 = 55 9: 34 + 55 = 89 ... etc.
Nowadays. An algorithm has been discovered for how to draw plants, things, objects in our computer simulation of the Universe. Starting with regular spiral shapes.
We must use a sequence of numbers, which in our reality is known as Fibonacci sequence. The sequence used here is when to each next date the previous one is added: “ 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89″... Correct geometry in nature, using the example of flowers, the structure of sunflowers, cones, sea shells, tornadoes, waves, splashes, etc. You will see how the objects diverge into the correct geometric lines from the center. Similar to Matrix proofs in nature?
What does this look like in our world? See below.
And also, great video.
Fact 7. Fractals.
The second thing became fractal geometry , discovered by the scientist Mandelbrot in 1977. Extremely simple algorithm, allowing you to get incorrect geometric shapes (not Fibonacci!), but by itself simple principle. Structures repeat themselves ad infinitum, from small to the largest scale.
There is no place for Chaos here. Fractal - self-similar geometric structure , each fragment of which is repeated as the scale decreases.
Whether you look through a telescope or a microscope, you will see the same construction principle. Examples? Microbes, bacteria, humans, mountain range- identical drawing. From small to huge.
Probably microbes, rivers and snowflakes also taught mathematics at school..? Or are they simply drawn by a giant processor on God's computer?
Below is a regular geometric fractal.
Explanation "on fingers".
Now is our reality.
Reality. Colony of bacteria in a cup.
Reality. Satellite view of the Putorana plateau, Russian Federation.
Reality. Human circulatory system.
Tree roots or human lungs?
Fact 8. Doubles and NPCs.
Now we need populate your simulation with people , that was not boring.
How many times have such things happened that people met their doubles on the streets, on the Internet, in other countries. Moreover, these were complete copies, down to the details. We have already written. And they are not relatives! it is very difficult to explain such similarity, if you do not take into account that, within the framework of the theory of “The Matrix” (), you do not need to be relatives to be 100% identical. The database of faces is still the same and players can create the same character as yours. That's the whole secret.
England+England. Copies, but not relatives.
The 'Twin Strangers' experiment. Pictured are Karen Branigan (left) and Niamh Geaney (right).
England+Italy.
The same “Twin Stranger” experiment. Niamh Geaney (left) and Luisa Guizzardi (right).
Now there are more NPCs.
Let's not forget to add NPC (non-player character) . These are human programs that are controlled by a computer. They have only a couple of thoughts, a minimum of emotions, a minimum of knowledge. Do you live in a city of 100 thousand people? How many people do you know well there? 100, 1000? And who is everyone else then, what are they doing around? They walk around, stand in lines, drive cars. They create the illusion of occupancy... right?
You won't be able to talk to them . They are busy and leave you on their own business. Consider that your social circle is limited to living players with whom “fate” and “scriptwriters” will pit you. The living include: family, relatives, work colleagues, nothing more. You will not be able to take a job that is not intended for you, and I think by our age you have already understood this. Have you ever been surprised by the fact that you send out 100 resumes for a job, and only 1 employer responds to you? Where do all the other resumes go? Where are all the other companies?
Who are all these people in my city?
Fact 9. What millions of people like .
or
“How to live another life”?
The computing power of the first computers was so limited that the first game looked like a square ball and rectangular platforms, hitting walls to the right or left. This game was called " PONG«.
1972
. « PONG«.
Then the games became more complicated and improved. Complex ones have appeared: shooting games, and the first drawn strategies.
1993. "DOOM and "Warcraft 2". 20 years of progress.
year 2009. The era of Total Wars. 36 years of progress.
year 2012. The era of MMOs. 40 years of progress.
For you MMO does not say anything? This - Massively Multiplayer Online games played by millions of people simultaneously, they all connect to the same server and see each other. This means that millions of people are simultaneously in the game and developing their characters and commanders. Second Life, World of Warcraft, World of Tanks just some of them. That is, if in the past you could command entire armies of thousands of soldiers, now you can play as an individual soldier, an individual tank on the battlefield, etc. You look for weapons for him, look for armor for him, develop, improve, make him stronger.
That is, the evolution of games went like this: square games -> challenging games-> command of armies -> development of 1 hero in the MMO world. We are one step away from our world.
Don't you think that next step there will be games in which you live through any time that interests you (antiquity, the Middle Ages, feudalism, world war) « right in the game“, feeling it from the inside, politics, betrayal, joy and love.
Moreover, modern games are improving at a crazy pace in terms of realistic graphics. Here's an engine for comparison: Unreal Engine 2015. How do you like the room and detail? Would you say this is a computer game?
Unreal Engine - digital graphics.
Real enough?
Graphics today. EVE: Valkyrie - 45 years after "Pong"
Fact 10. Final argument.
And if there is opportunity and resources , then why not try to make one A game like OUR WORLD ?
Realistic, brutal, according to the rules of survival . If you didn’t earn money, you didn’t eat. If he didn’t eat, he became weak, fell ill, and died. This is a very tough game for beginners. Moreover, you should be taken care of for at least 7-10 years after birth. Otherwise, you exit the game without ever starting to play.
Results: what are the signs computer simulation of the universe?
Our 10 :
1. Everything runs on electricity.
2. There are laws that we obey.
3. Electric fields- the illusion of a solid world.
4. DNA is a program code.
5. Corpuscular-wave dualism - detailing of the surrounding world (close/far).
6. Golden ratio Fibonacci: simple geometry. Shells, flowers, water, etc.
7. Fractals: complex geometry. From snowflakes to mountain ranges, rivers, bacteria and the structure of human tissues.
8. Doubles + NPCs = illusion of world population.
9. MMO - chosen by millions of people, and millions more are on the way.
10. If possible, why not create such a world?