There's no turning around,

we're going to go there.

Most forecasts believe that the Metaverse

by the end of the decade will be between

$6 and $13 trillion.

There's confusion and/or disagreement

as to exactly what it is, what it requires, when it arrives.

I think many people have heard the term 'metaverse'

over the past year with the idea

that society's going to transform.

The Metaverse is not an all-encompassing clear vision

of the future-it is an ambition, it's a hypothesis.

At its core, the Metaverse should be understood

as a fourth wave of computing and networking.

The first was the Mainframe era-

most of us think about IBM supercomputers-

that was succeeded by personal computing and the internet,

succeeded in turn by the mobile and cloud era.

But we, as a society, as people, Homo sapiens,

did not evolve for thousands of years

to interact with 2D interfaces,

we didn't evolve to learn by tapping a piece of glass.

That arc leaves many to believe

that the next evolution is 3D experiences.

My name's Matthew Ball, I'm the CEO and founder of Epyllion.

I'm also the author of "The Metaverse:

And How It Will Revolutionize Everything."

It's sometimes helpful to explain what the Metaverse is not.

First, it's not just immersive virtual reality,

or what many consider a virtual reality headset.

It's also not a video game.

We see now hundreds of millions of people

spending their lives, their friendships,

inside 3D-rendered social and virtual worlds.

But of course, the Metaverse is a combination

of many different technologies,

and it is not just for a game.

It will not replace the internet,

it will build iteratively on top of it.

But, it's not fully predictable.

Much like there was no technical understanding in 1995

that told you exactly what life

would be right now on the Internet.

Facebook, or now Meta, was born of the PC era,

and became far more valuable and successful

in the mobile era.

The reason for this is 'recursive technology.'

Someone invents a new technology,

and that new technology is responded to by consumers

and developers who build new things or use that technology

in ways that are predicted and not predicted.

I define the Metaverse as:

A massively-scaled

and interoperable network

of real-time-rendered 3D virtual worlds

which can be experienced synchronously

and persistently by an effectively unlimited number

of users each with an individual sense of presence;

while supporting continuity of data,

such as history, identity, communications,

payments, entitlements, and objects.

Should I redo that?

Massively-scaled is one of the easier elements

of my Metaverse definition, and that largely observes

that the internet would not be the internet

if it just had 20 websites.

The term itself comes from dystopic science fiction

coined by Neal Stephenson in 1992.

And it refers to 'meta,' a Greek term,

as in "greater than or encompassing all verses"-

all individual virtual worlds and experiences as a subunit.

But describing the number of dimensions

or the visual aesthetic of a virtual world

reflects just one element.

A virtual world is really any computer-simulated

and rendered virtual space.

It can be immersive,

which is what you would think of as a VR headset.

It can be an augmented reality, in text, in 2D.

Or it could be in three dimensions,

like a "Super Mario" or "Legend of Zelda" game made today.

3D is a key specification because at its core,

the Metaverse is talking about a parallel plane

of existence, a second place where we can live

and coexist and socialize.

And by the way, we may come to find

that the term 'metaverse' does creep

into really any socially-focused 3D-rendered experience.

We typically identify platforms

such as "Minecraft" or "Roblox" or "Fortnite."

Some go as far as saying "Call of Duty"

or "Legend of Zelda" which are narrative,

non-generative experiences are metaverses,

but the technical, academic, and mainstream definition:

it's the definite article, The Metaverse, not A Metaverse,

and certainly not Metaverses.

It was intended to describe the unified experience

of all interconnected or interoperable virtual worlds.

Interoperability is one of the most complex

and yet essential elements of the Metaverse.

It effectively refers to the ability

for different autonomous systems

or independently-operated simulations,

3D-rendered virtual worlds,

to not just talk to one another,

but to do so safely and coherently.

That's how you go from one destination to another.

We tend not to think about interoperability very much

because the internet, as it exists today, is interoperable.

You can download an image from your Facebook,

upload it to Snapchat,

then turn it into a slideshow you post to YouTube.

This is why your single web browser,

your single session, can take you there.

Without interoperability for 3D assets and experiences,

you can't take anything that you did previously

to any new place, you can't communicate

to anyone who isn't doing the precise experiences you are.

Without interoperability, it would be lost.

Real-time rendering is really fun to talk about.

Rendering refers to the process

of generating a computer image.

We see this in a Pixar movie, for example.

But for a real-time experience, one that we experience,

a good way to think about this would be

to take a look at Google Maps street view.

That is not real-time rendered,

the image has already been generated, it's static,

it's locked in time.

What we're talking about is a virtual world

that exists in response to us,

to know we're there, be affected by us.

Synchronous basically means

that we're in a shared experience.

Think of yourself as a video call.

There are multiple different people all participating,

and if they lag, it's fine, right?

Your system may lose a few words,

it might play them back quickly,

it rapidly edits out the extra silence

so that you can catch up.

If someone drops, if they're not speaking, nobody cares.

But when we're talking about a massively-scaled

synchronous experience, it's coexistence.

We need everyone to be experiencing it together.

Now, in a computer simulation,

this question of persistence is philosophically,

what endures, what continues.

When you shoot a tree in a shooter game,

you'll see the bullet mark,

but 10 minutes later, is it important for you to see it?

If you ran to a specific part of a map, if you saw a friend,

if you spoke to a character,

most games assume that that information

is not going to be important,

and so they don't actually manifest it.

There's no critical need for the ground to wear

as more people walk on it,

much like a traditional grass path would.

Persistence of the world, persistence of my history,

of the things that we've done is understood

to be essential on a data and an experiential layer.

Almost nothing in virtual world today is persistent:

it's essentially forgotten.

It's like moving out of the movie theater

and the second you're out there,

you no longer remember what you saw, who you were with,

and where even you were.

How many things can the system do?

They need to reflect the world as it's known,

and reflect the world in response to individual actions.

It's a question of:

What memory can be managed?

And what information can be processed?