A SMALL WORLD. AN UNEXPECTED CONSEQUENCE.

One more road.
One worse commute?

A city gets a free shortcut. Every driver chooses the fastest route. Predict the result, then change the traffic to find where your intuition works.

The original city

Two routes
65minutes per trip

The city with a shortcut

One added road
?minutes per trip
1,000 · quiet morning10,000 · rush hour
Will the shortcut make this trip faster?

Make a prediction. Then meet the other timeline.

Both worlds have identical demand and road rules. The only difference is the new connector. The roads are a mathematical thought experiment; the glowing dots illustrate route use.

Why this happens · inspect the model

This is a simplified illustration of Braess’s paradox and network routing games. It shows a possible incentive problem, not a forecast for a real city.

Home → A and B → Work each cost x / 100 minutes, where x is that road’s traffic. Home → B and A → Work each cost 45 minutes. The added connector goes A → B, at zero cost. Drivers independently choose minimum-time routes at equilibrium; traffic is treated as divisible. There are no traffic lights, physical queues, changing departure times, or adaptive road capacities.

Without the connector, demand N splits evenly and trip time is N / 200 + 45. With the connector: for N ≤ 4,500, everyone uses it and time is N / 50; for 4,500 < N < 9,000, time is 90; for N ≥ 9,000 the connector carries no traffic and time is N / 200 + 45. These formulas are evaluated locally. At N = 4,000 the times are 65 and 80 minutes.

The numerical result is deterministic. Particle timing is decorative and is not a microscopic traffic simulation. The tour changes demand, so each scene is a separate paired comparison. No live model calls, account, analytics, audio, or network requests are needed to play.