»Please help! Why constantly free 23 people?«

I have seen the trilogy three times and I still cannot answer all the questions. The thing that bothers me the most is why did the machines constatly need to extract 23 people from the Matrix to rebuild Zion? Why couldn't the machines just go on without people outside the Matrix? I'm not even gonna ask why those 23 people had to be chosen by Neo! Please, if you've got answers,give 'em to me !

The machines need Zion because of the choice problem.

The One, which is the sum of the 'choice-bug', must come to the Source out of his own free will and for this they need the setting of Zion.

23 is the number of human chromosomes which could symbolize the birth of true humans of flesh and blood in the new Zion setting.

Also, this is my personal take:

Consider that Neo had chosen the other door, then I am sure they would have informed him about Bane, resulting in the survival of Maggie.

This gives us:

Maggie + Niobe + 16 females selected by Neo = 18 females

Morpheus + Link + Ghost + Operator from the Logos + Captain Roland + Hammer Crew (which are 6 guys, count them!) + 7 males selected by Neo = 18 males

This balances both sexes. Ofcourse we still have Neo, but he is the One, so as the myth goes on he stands on his own.

Now if you consider numerology, then you get:

18 + 18 + 1 = 37 --> 3 + 7 = 10 = 1 + 0 = 1 (the One)

Or 18 + 18 + 1 = 37 --> 3 + 7 = 10 --> zero-one (or zi-on) --> both beginning and end as the Architect stated

I want to thank you for answering me. Your ideas about the number 23 are excellent. I have come up with a new idea: 23 is a prime number; prime -> one-> the one.
What i really don't get is this: what is the choice problem? why is Neo the sum of the choice-bug? and, more important, why do the machines need Neo to come to the Source?
What I want to say is this. What's the point in taking people out of the Matrix?

The Matrix can only run smoothly if all the partipants of the simulation (100%) are accepting it's rules.

Even if a minority (1%) does not fully accept the rules, then the computer program is getting upset, suffering from unwanted fluctuations, which you could simplify to the word 'bug'.

If nothing is done about this 'bug', which is growing and causing more and more unstabil situations inside the Matrix, then the program will eventually break down and crash.

But what if you sum up the code/debris/bugs (whatever you want to call it) into one variable and give it a purpose? Then you might have a chance that the program can stay online.

Neo, the One, digitally carries the sum. It is the sum of all non-acceptence (all the people who say/said 'no' to the rules of the Matrix). That's also the reason why Neo can break every rule inside the Matrix, because he is the sum of all rule-breaking.

Now, what if you can make the variable that carries the full identification of non-acceptence, turn over? I mean, what if he, out of free will, chooses to accept the program again? He then 'speaks' for all of the non-acceptence and converts it back to acceptence, making the equation round/balanced which then can be used to fluently start another loop of the Matrix without the need to go offline and without the need of killing all the people connected to the Matrix.

I hoped this helped

Hey, Mobil I think that the "bug" that the Architect has to deal with is like a memory leak.

People who don't know what it is read here: en.wikipedia.org...

Quote:

As is noted below, a memory leak has similar symptoms to a number of other problems, and generally can only be diagnosed by a programmer with access to the program source code

Hm.. could this programmer with access to the source code be the Architect? or maybe Neo after he chooses the door to the Source.

A memory leak is not a serious problem, but if not controlled / fixed can make the whole system crash.

What do you think?

PS At last, there is someone here that I can talk about computer analogy!

Sorry to say, but the computer programming perspective will not get you too far in decoding the matrix.

intell wrote:

Sorry to say, but the computer programming perspective will not get you too far in decoding the matrix.

intell, I already said that before here: matrix-explained.com...

th3 p4th wrote:

Well I am a programmer myself, but believe me that doesn't help a lot to decode the Matrix Trilogy.. Of course there are some things that others don't notice but there aren't so many, and their importance is not high. Remember.. the Ws are just geeks.. not computer geeks!

But I'm sure that certain things in the Trilogy can be looked from that perspective. What do you think Mobil?

I agree. But those things you speak of are only there because of the setting. iow they are there for the same reason Star Wars or Star Trek has stars and planets in their settings.

Come on, it's not the same thing! But anyway if they are there and someone spots them, I don't see what's wrong on commenting on them? As you said, there are many perspectives to look at the films.. (matrix-explained.com...)

Da Vinci seeks for certain patterns, well I enjoy to think about computers. Afterall you said "But those things you speak of are only there because of the setting." So at least I'm not off topic!

And it helps explaining things sometimes, yes? no?

Yes it helps..to an extent.

th3 p4th wrote:

Come on, it's not the same thing!

Yes it is. Here's how: George Lucas made some movies about a certain theme - corruption of both an individual and an entire government/culture complex. But since he used space as a setting for it, then he was under obligation to show action take place in space and on different planets.

But these are not movies about space or space travel. There are many things that would be considered way off in the real world of space exploration but we realize this is all for the setting and just go along. We know it would be futile to dissect the movies according to what we know about space technology and think we can arrive at the purpose for the movie, right?

Well the writers of the matrix used aspects of computer programming so that the setting would be more realistic. An exploration of a setting will only reveal how much work and knowledge the writers/directors were willing to put forth and not much else. You might see the feasibility of some of the actions of some of the characters in the actual matrix from such an exploration according to the way computers actually work today but that's about it. You'll never get anywhere near the purpose of the films.

th3 p4th wrote:

As you said, there are many perspectives to look at the films.

intell wrote:

That is a perspective, not necessarily the definitive big picture.

What I'm saying is that there is a big picture.

th3 p4th wrote:

Da Vinci seeks for certain patterns, well I enjoy to think about computers.

And I find both of your writings interesting so by all means carry on, I was just throwing out a word of caution

intell wrote:

You'll never get anywhere near the purpose of the films.

What's their purpose?

Gina Rink is posting it now.

th3 p4th wrote:

A memory leak is not a serious problem, but if not controlled / fixed can make the whole system crash. What do you think? PS At last, there is someone here that I can talk about computer analogy!

I don't think it is a memory leak.

It's more about input and output alongside the symbiose that the Matrix has with the physical human brain.

The input is the rules of the program, but if the output of a specific human is non compliant, then there is a problem...

Let's say that the rules of gravity are present inside the Matrix, but a minor club of humans deny this rule. They can do this; the human mind is a very powerfull entity that can overcome certain 'believes', pains and instincts at the use of free will.

The program cannot process this denial and absorb it. Instead the program will 'dump' the unaccepted data somewhere in the Matrix (for example: the haunted house in the Animatrix, where there is an area without gravity).

While this only is about minor incidents (that's why the Architect says: "...burden assidiously avoided"), they will happen more often and at a larger scale. These defects in the system will alarm/wake up other people, causing even more unstable situations, ultimately resulting in a crash.

Mobil_Ave_Neo wrote:

I don't think it is a memory leak.

I didn't say that it's a memory leak. It doesn't make sense that way. I said that it would help people to think of it as a memory leak. Like you using the pagefile / swap file example at your Mobil_Ave_Neo's theory thread.

Hahaha yes then it makes sense.

Damn you have studied my pieces well

"I am what I am and I do what I can."

By the way the "Logos Operator" that you are talking about to your first post at this thread is called Sparks. But I know that you hate him.

LOL yes that's why his name slipped my mind.

Thanks (or better said: damn you) for reminding me