A Note To The Readers...

 

I am interested in the sciences, namely physics, which explains my fascination for understanding how things work in our universe, our world.  When I started thinking about the fact that Second Life was called a virtual "world," I formulated the bias that the term "world" could not possibly be the correct term for this software.  I thought that a world is too limiting.  With the term "world" comes a set of rules which is governed by physics and does not allow us to do certain things.  For example, no matter how much we would like to be able to, we cannot teleport or time travel.  These facts immediately gave me the bias that "world" is too limiting of a term.

 

After discovering my bias, I asked myself the following questions:

1) What is a world?

2) Does the definition change based on who/what defines it?

3) What boundaries exist in a world?

4) Does Second Life fit in these boundaries?

5) What does virtual mean?

6) What should replace the term virtual, if anything?

7) What should replace the term world, if anything?

 

While researching, my major difficulty was dealing with the term "virtual."  I did now know that I would also have to deal with this part of the term until I started researching.  The problem was that several definitions stated that it had to do with something "real."  Of course teleporting and time travel are not real, but the concepts themselves are real.  Also, the graphic representation itself is real, even though it is of something against the laws of physics.  So I had to decide, is this unreality what makes it real?  In other words, I had to decide if it is not real because it would not translate into my world where I live my "real life," or if it is real because the graphic rendering itself does exist.  The graphic rendering can be seen and therefore is confirmable.

 

This part of the paper could be further explored and developed in the future, and could possibly change the paper a bit.  In my case, I realized at the end of the paper than it did not matter too much because I kept the term "virtual" anyway.  This type of thought probably falls more in the "world of philosophy," which I did not address at all in my paper.

 

I originally thought that the term which should replace the term world would still be a building block of the universe, i.e. solar system, galaxy, or the universe itself.  I then discovered that the terms world and universe are interchangeable, so if the term "world" is too binding, than any term which defines something smaller than the universe would be even more binding.

 

It's A Small World After All

 

Many think of our world as a vast one that stretches from north pole to south pole, from America to China, with a lot of other places in between. Though this is a lot of space, it is pretty much the extent of our world in people's imaginations.  There is a definite border to our world, which few things may cross, but for the most part our world pretty much keeps to itself.  Do these same borders exist in virtual worlds?  Should they exist?  There are many implications that are brought about by naming something such as Second Life or Heritage Key a virtual "world."  The fact is that people or avatars are not forced to stay in one place by laws of physics in virtual worlds, so the de facto borders which exist by calling these online communities virtual "worlds" are much more permeable.  Upon examining this fact, the question becomes whether or not they are so permeable that they in fact do not exist, thus disqualifying the term "world" to be applied to these online communities such as Second Life or Heritage Key.  If "world" is not qualified to follow the term "virtual," there must be something that is.  What about the term "virtual?"  This term also carries its own set of implications.  If something like Second Life, which is called a "virtual world,"  does not fit either word's implications, then perhaps the entire term must be thrown out.  The public's definition and the academic definition of the word "virtual" are two different things, and because of this the use of this word may continue.  The term "world," however, is far too limiting, and should be replaced with the term "realm" so that the the user does not think that he or she is immediately limited to what he or she may do just because of its name.

 

In order to get a better understanding of what a "world" actually is, it is necessary to explore the term according to many different disciplines.  One term that is heard often is "world economics" or "the world of business."  In order to better understand the extent to which the "world" of economics reaches, one should examine a particular organization which claims to participate in world economics, such as the World Bank.  According to The Handbook of International Financial Terms, the World Bank, also known as the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, is defined as, "An international provider of funds to International Monetary Fund member countries that may be experiencing difficulties in raising capital for long-term projects" (Handbook).  According to this definition, the only entities which may participate in the benefits of this "World" Bank are member countries. This implies that the world is made up of all of the countries which exist within it.  This is because only countries, and the smaller building blocks of countries such as cities, towns, and provinces which make up a country, may have economies.  This definition excludes things such as oceans and the atmosphere because an ocean or the atmosphere may not have an economy since humans, whose daily lives build an economy, cannot live there.  According to world economics, if a particular system or entity does not have an economy, it is not of this world.

 

Just as economics has a definition of what makes up this world, so does literature.  The world according to literature is not nearly as concrete as it is according to economics.  According to Dr. Joseph Essid, professor and director of the writing center at the University of Richmond, the term "world" is used "as a metaphor for a closed system created by an author" (Essid).  Though according to this definition the term is somewhat flexible and changes from author to author, it is still obviously closed.  He goes on to say, "Thus 'the world of Charles Dickens' captures a certain era in London and 'the world of Edgar Allan Poe' captures the author's dark obsessions with death, premature burial, and lost love" (Essid).  This implies that "A certain era in London" is not part of Edgar Allan Poe's world, nor is a "dark obsession with death" part of Charles Dicken's world. Though this definition allows for the potential to be very inclusive of most anything, each individual "world" is segmented off by the borders of what the author writes about.  

 

Skyler Intermenos visiting the graphic rendering of The House of Usher in Second Life.  An inside view of Poe's world of literature.

 

Sociology also presents its idea of a "world" through the term "social world."  According to the Dictionary of Sociology, a social world is, "A term which is frequently applied to 'universes of discourse' through which common symbols, organizations, and activities emerge.  They involve cultural areas which need not be physically bounded." (Dictionary of Sociology).  This definition states explicitly that there are no actual physical boundaries whatsoever.  The boundaries are introduced in the next statement which reads, "Typical examples might be the 'social worlds' of surfing, nursing, politics, or science." (Dictionary of Sociology).  In this case, the social "world" is confined to a particular hobby, profession, or culture.  For example, the social world of a professor is closed off to anyone who is not a PhD holding academic at an institution of higher learning.  The term "universes of discourse," however, implies that this can be applied anywhere and everywhere.  If there were professors on Mars of Venus, they would still be part of the same "social world."

 

Lastly, it is important to define what a world is according to the sciences.  The Glossary of Astronomy and Astrophysics defines a world model as "A mathematical model of the Universe" (Hopkins).  This brings another term into question - universe.  The definition is clear that something which physically exists is being described through mathematical terms, but it is unclear what a universe is.  The Dictionary of Physics defines the universe as "a term for...the entire world, or (astronomically) the space filled with radiation and matter" (Universe).  This definition appears to say that the terms "world" and "universe" are interchangeable.  It then goes on to say that though the universe consists of all matter and radiation ever created, it is bounded to just those things that are physical.  If the terms "universe" and "world" are interchangeable, then this must also be true of the world.  The world, at least according to the scientific definition, is bound to the things which exist physically.  This fact is confirmed by the book Conceptions of a Cosmos when it states that a scientist named Eddington once said, "[a] world is now understood to be a world where something really happens" (Kragh 153).  This "happening" must be confirmable.  In order to confirm it, according to this physical world frame of mind, there must be some time of physical representation or results as a consequence of this happening.

 

A couple videos illustrating the vastness of the universe, or the world.

 

This definition leaves out many important things.  For example, it only addresses the matter and radiation which exists right now.  It does not say, "All matter which has existed, still exists, and will exist in the future."  This is because there is a certain law of physics called the Law of Conservation of Matter.  According to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, "the amount of mass remains constant--mass is neither created nor destroyed" (NASA.gov).  The world, by definition, is bound by the laws of physics.

 

A brief explanation of the law of conservation of mass.

 

As observed through the various definitions of the word "world," a world is a very large entity.  It consists of absolutely everything, but only in a given category at a given time.  For example, the world according to economics is only everything which has an economy, but does not include the oceans or atmosphere.  The world of Poe is everything which Poe writes about, but does not include anything at all which Dickens has written about.  The social world of a professor is the culture of teaching classes at a higher institution and participating in research, but not the culture of seeking the largest waves as a surfer does.  The physical world is everything which physically exists now, but does not include anything that is not physical, such as the world of Charles Dickens according to his literature.

 

It must also be noted that all of these definitions are only concerned with the present.  For example, if an author wrote about one topic during the 1930's, and another topic during the 1950's, they are not considered to be in the same "literary world," since they represent two different things metaphorically.  The economic situation of the 1820's is not considered part of the economic world anymore because that economy no longer exists.  All "worlds" are therefore constrained by time, regardless of what type of world it is.

 

Not only are these definitions excluding many other things, they fail to provide the potential to include them.  Though when physics attempts to define a "world" it tires to include everything, it does not and never will.  As the world of a particular author grows and grows, nothing at all is done to the physical world.  Physics only has the ability to describe what actually physically exists, and the same goes for all other categories in their respective areas.

 

Do virtual "worlds" fit within these boundaries?  In order to fit within these boundaries, a virtual world must be bound by the same factors which bind something to a world in first life, in its respective category.  A "virtual world" does not claim to be an "economic world," a "literary world," a "social world," or a "physical world," but rather a "virtual world."  This means that the first word of the term, "virtual," must also be examined.  Ralph Schroeder of the Oxford Internet Institute and author f or the Journal of Virtual Worlds Research states, "In popular discourse, the world 'virtual' has come to mean anything online" (Schroeder 2).  Popular discourse, however, is not always an academically sound way of defining things.  Schroeder continues by saying that this is actually not true because this definition is "too broad" (2).  This means that the term "virtual" is bound by something.  This is to be expected as the first word of the terms "economic world," "literary world," "social world," and "physical world" also limit the extent to which the "world" may reach.  A Dictionary of the Internet defines virtual as an " Adjective used to describe an experience or entity which is a simulation of something real" (Dictionary of Internet).  Virtual, according to this definition, is a simulation of something real, not the actual real thing.  Further, the term "real," according to the Oxford English Dictionary, means, "Having an objective existence; actually existing physically as a thing" (Oxford).  This means that a "virtual world" should be most comparable to a "physical world."

 

The fact is that the same laws which govern the real, physical universe do not govern the virtual worlds such as Second Life and Heritage Key.  In his book Second Life: A Guide to Your Virtual World, Brian White states that walking or even running is a waste of time and that in order to save time and see more of Second Life, one should teleport from place to place (35).  There is of course nothing real about this.  One can not affect the forth dimension, time, by teleporting.  Not only does this require changing the dimension of time, but it also suggests than the matter temporarily disappeared and was transported to another location where it reappeared.  This of course goes against the Law of Conservation of Matter. One may also create new virtual real estate out of thin air.  This is one of the distinguishing factors of a "virtual world."  At any time, one can construct new buildings or build a new island with virtual "matter" which does not exist until it is used to build something.  This magical creation of matter also goes against the Law of Conservation of Matter. 

 

The physics of teleporting, time travel, wormholes, etc.

 

Not only can one teleport, but an avatar may also fly.  Unfortunately for humans, it is impossible to fly.  The fact that avatars in Second Life are able to fly goes against the real law of gravity, which the Dictionary of Environment and Conservation states is "The force that pulls a body towards the center of the Earth of another celestial body" (Environment and Conservation).  There is obviously supposed to be some type of representation of gravity within these virtual worlds since none of the buildings fly away.  The disregard for the laws of physics, such as the Law of Conservation of Matter and gravity, disqualifies a "virtual world" from being called "virtual," according to the academic definition of the word.

 

Proof that humans cannot fly.  This is what happens when humans try to fly.

 

Furthermore, an avatar may go visit another time period in history.  For example, one can go talk to Sigmund Freud, who is no longer alive today. One may also visit various cities of the future.  This affects the dimension of time, which may not be affected while still being considered a world. The term "world," therefore, is also disqualified from the term "virtual world." 

 

Skyler Intermenos visiting the great Sigmund Freud on December 10, 2009.  Freud died in 1939.

 

If the term "virtual world" does not fit, something else must.  To replace the word "virtual," a term is needed which describes all things both real and unreal, physical and in thought.  To replace the word "world," a term is needed which encompasses anything and everything at any given time. The time must also be adjustable.

 

Skyler Intermenos visiting the "Punkrock City of the Future" in Second Life.

 

A viable replacement for the term "world" is the word "realm."  According to the Oxford English Dictionary, a world is "the 'realm' within which one moves or lives (Oxford).  According to this definition, a world, which is all encompassing in its respective category, is the particular realm within which one lives.  This implies that there are other realms, which may or may not have the same rules as a world.  It goes on to say that a realm is the "domain of an abstract quality, state, etc" (Oxford).  Something that is abstract, by definition, has no rules to follow.  A certain sense of freedom is implied from the term.  This freedom could allow the forth dimension of time to be altered.

 

The problem with trying to replace the term "virtual" is that there is no adjective in the english language which includes the real and the imaginary. They are antonyms and can therefore not be grouped together.  In most humans' minds everything that is real is real, and everything that is imaginary is imaginary.  They are two separate "worlds" with no intersecting point.

 

This is of course according to the academic definition of "virtual" used for research purposes - that it must represent something real.  If one goes according to the common usage of the term "virtual," which states "virtual" means anything online, then its usage is correct.

 

The term "virtual" can therefore continue being used, but only because of the lack of a better term, and because of its incorrect usage by the public.  All companies which call their products and software "virtual worlds" should however change "world" to "realm."  From this point on, Second Life and Heritage Key, as well as all other similar programs, should consider themselves as"virtual realms."  The term "world" is too limiting and suggests that one cannot do as much while in-world as one actually can do.  When one starts an account for a Virtual Realm, he or she will immediately think that he or she can do more than they would if they were starting an account for a Virtual World.

  

Works Cited

 

Coleman, Larry, Herman Cummins, Monika Lynker, Peter McClintock, Michael Payne, Steven Shore, Paul Tipler, and Michael Wiescher, eds.  "World Line."  Dictionary of Physics.  Vol. 4. London: Macmillan, 2004. 2464.  Print.

 

"Conservation of Mass."  NASA. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Dec. 2009. <http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/mass.html>. 

 

Essid, Joseph.  Electronic mail interview.  6 December 2009.  

 

"Gravity." A Dictionary of Environment and Conservation. Chris Park.  Oxford University Press, 2007.  Oxford Reference Online.  Oxford University Press.  University of Richmond.  11 December 2009.  <http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t244.e3465>.

 

Hopkins, Jeanne.  Glossary of Astronomy and Astrophysics.  Chicago: University of Chicago, 1976.  Print.

 

Kragh, Helge. Conceptions of Cosmos: From Myths to the Accelerating Universe: A History of Cosmology. New York: Oxford University Press, USA, 2007.

 

"real." The Oxford English Dictionary.  OED Online.  Oxford University Press.  10 December 2009.  <http://dictionary.oed.com/>.

 

"realm." The Oxford English Dictionary.  OED Online.  Oxford University Press.  10 December 2009.  <http://dictionary.oed.com/>.

 

Schroeder, Ralph.  "Defining Virtual Worlds and Virtual Environments."  Journal of Virtual Worlds Research 1.1 (2008): 2. Online.

 

"Social Worlds." A Dictionary of Sociology.  John Scott and Gordon Marshall.  Oxford University Press 2009.  Oxford Reference Online.  Oxford University Press.  University of Richmond.  8 December 2009.  <http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t88.e2177>

 

"World Bank." The Handbook of International Financial Terms. Peter Moles and Nicholas Terry.  Oxford University Press 1997.  Oxford Reference Online.  Oxford University Press.  University of Richmond.  8 December 2009.  <http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t181.e8398>

 

"Virtual."  A Dictionary of Internet.  Darrell Ince.  Oxford University Press, 2009.  Oxford Reference Online.  Oxford University Press.  University of Richmond.  10 December 2009.  <http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t12.e3391>

 

White, Brian A. Second Life (R): A Guide to Your Virtual World. Indianapolis: Que, 2007. 

 

 

Back To My Home Page