What is more efficient, for example, move the world and lets say, a ship, isnt moving, but the world is instantiated everytime the ship reach to a defines limit, OR, the ship moving and the world intantiating but when the ship reach to a defined limit the world instantiates. What i mean is that the ship can move through space limitless, but in the first option the player stay in the same place. Do you understood?
Move as few things as possible to get the effect you desire, especially if physics are involved. In rare cases, moving the environment is the better option, but in this case, I strongly advise to move only the ship.
I assume you’re making a free-movement game where the concern becomes a huge play area for the ship to wind up in over time. In that case I would advise to still primarily move the ship, but opportunistically reset the ship and its immediate setting to world zero (or wherever your scene center is), infrequently, ideally when the performance cost will not add to already taxing events, so during a lull in action, movement, or gameplay (such as transitioning to a menu, loading a region with a black screen bumper, etc).
[Edit] if your world is small and condensed, like a planetary sphere on which a ship is moving, it becomes more reasonable to rotate the world instead of the ship, to preserve simplicity of orientation. However, it would depend on things like your control scheme, what’s happening on the surface, whether you can parent it to the planet or not, etc, so ultimately even then the path of least resistance usually points to just moving the individual mobile elements.