Uh ... I don't know why this is made into such a big deal. There was a agent-based simulation done at Stanford back in the mid 90s that demonstrated this. About the only thing I can think of is if that these guys developed mathematical proofs. That would be something. The article wasn't too clear on it. It is not that much different from fluid dynamics simulations.<p>However, " Drivers and policy-makers have not previously known why jams like this occur, though many have put it down to the sheer volume of traffic." is a load of crap -- unless said drivers and policy-makers have been living under a rock for the past decade.<p>The Stanford simulation was done to also show how cars that drives themselves can reduce traffic jams. The computer will always maintain a certain distance. Furthermore I recently read about the origins of 'Futurama' -- the citation escapes me. After WWII, GM had created a nice, big exhibit telling folks to go out there and build the US interstate highway system. So they could sell you more cars. The designer who conceived of the highway system had also conceived of 'smart cars' as well, having the foresight to see our current traffic problems.<p>Besides, the article has many comments referencing different simulations done in the past, since the 1970s. If these guys figured out a mathematical proof, that's something. If not, then the article does have much going for it.<p>It sometimes disturbs me that the our cultural insistence on Progress denies us of our evolutionary history.
Hrm, I was hoping it was a longer article with some new insight, but it's an introductory piece. If this is all news to you, check out "Turtles, Termites, and Traffic James", and "The Computational Beauty of Nature"
Oddly enough I heard Howard Stern say the exact same thing years ago. That's odd for two reasons. 1) he's a moron (blind squirrel/acorn theory I guess) and 2) I've only listened to him maybe three times ever.