The Live Broadcast Is Reduced a Million Times: This Is Really Not a Special Effect!

🤔 1. You can only use "times" when enlarging, but not when reducing. You can only use "reduce to a few fractions" to describe it. I really didn't expect that this issue would be criticized by some readers. You can search the Internet for the expression "how many times it is reduced", and there are many expressions like this. Isn't this an unforgivable mistake? It can only be said that it is not standard and rigorous, but this is not an academic paper. Does it need such a rigorous expression? But I believe most people can understand it when written like this. They know that shrinking by several times means dividing the size by a number. If someone insists that they can't understand it, then I can only say that you are right. You can't wake up people who pretend to be asleep. 🤫 🤔 2. The virus can be discovered at such a small size, how could the little humans not be able to detect it? Are all humans blind in the world? When I saw someone asking this, I knew that he must have picked something wrong without watching much. These will be explained in the subsequent plots. It was said at the beginning that the small humans mastered the curse seal technique. They were not ordinary creatures, but with fantasy colors. They naturally had fantasy methods that humans could not understand to hide themselves. Do I have to throw out all the settings at the beginning to ensure that everything is perfect before continuing to develop the plot? 🥵 General readers will feel unreasonable when they see this, but they will also think about whether the author will fill this hole. However, some people really like to talk about something unreasonable immediately when they see it. I once encountered a paragraph commentator who angrily criticized the unreasonableness of this paragraph and gave vivid examples and cited a lot of truths. In fact, the explanation was given on the next page. He didn't even read the next page and started his performance directly. I could only be speechless about this. 😅 🤔3. Questions about volume and mass. Some people say that the human body is different from a cuboid. There are many twists and turns, and the volume formula of the cuboid cannot be used to calculate the change rate of the volume. I don't want to explain this anymore. You can use the volume formulas of other geometric bodies to calculate whether they are all cubes of the magnification of size change, or you can just ask a math teacher. 😡 As for the change rate of mass, search the formulas for mass, density and volume. When the density remains unchanged, is the volume change rate the same as the mass change rate? 😵 Summary: I have been writing online articles for 2 years. There is no doubt that I am a street writer. I cannot refute this. However, during these 2 years, I have also learned a lot of experience through readers' comments. As a tool for public entertainment, most readers pursue relaxation and pleasure, hoping to get a comfortable and pleasant pleasure from it. This is why most online articles now focus on refreshing points and ignore logic, which is the so-called "brainless coolness". But it is undeniable that there are readers who have artistic pursuits, but they are definitely only a minority. Most authors care about grades, so they have to cater to the preferences of most readers. Just like some people don't understand that today's books cannot be written without a system. In fact, this is the result of market selection. There are far more people who like it than don't, so writing a system is easy to get results, and naturally there are more people writing it. Personally, I will try to minimize unreasonable things when writing, but mistakes will inevitably occur. Like the first question above, I admit that I am not rigorous enough, but if I must be rigorous, then I have to change it to "Live Broadcast: The size is reduced to one millionth of the original size"... It seems that there is no need, and this place is rigorous, do other places need to be more rigorous? I'm not a professional scholar, so I really can't do it. 😭 I write books hoping to bring happiness to everyone (of course, it would be even better if you can make a little money! 🤐). I hope everyone can calm down when reading the book. If you point out obvious mistakes, I will definitely correct them! Finally, I wish you all everything goes well in life and your favorite books will never be updated! I also wish that the epidemic will end soon. I now go to work + write articles + epidemic prevention every day. It is like working three jobs in a row, so tired 😭😭😭

It's a pity. It's a good subject, but the author insists on seeking death, but he just writes disgusting routines. It's too poisonous.

A million times. . . . . . Author, please think about it first. Can someone calculate two meters for you? 100 Times 2 centimeters, 1000 times 2 millimeters, 10,000 times 2 silk meters, and one million times directly into microns. It is an ant as big as a dog. . . An ant as big as a dog can be up to 1000 times bigger

Let me explain to all readers who want to complain when they see the title of the book. A million times refers to a reduction of a million times in volume, and a reduction in height and size of 100 times. For those students who have studied geometry in math class, please do the math. After the length, width and height of a cuboid are reduced by 100 times, how many times will the volume be reduced? 😜

Many plots cannot stand up to scrutiny, and the logic is not closed loop, but it is still very interesting to watch without thinking 😥

Everything else is easy to understand, but the writing of the strength-preserving giant is too weak. With a million times the strength, every fight is dangerous and dangerous. People who can press to death with one finger have to go through hardships to win. Especially the martial arts masters who came out later can also fight with the protagonist (in fact, they were beaten at the beginning). This is a bit unreasonable. I really think that defeating ten with one force is just a joke!

The idea is very good, similar to Lilliput, but in a different way! It's worth the investment. 18 Votes will be given first, and you will continue to vote later. Remember to come up with the highlights when you have time.

Alas, a good subject is useless again. It's really hard to find a good book.

Now the starting point is no longer working. I guide the poison every day. Forget about the poison. Fortunately, several of them are eunuchs.

The creativity is very good, but the live broadcast is a rough spot. Don't you treat others as fools? After you get this cheat, you should make short videos or movies. You can't expect others to be blind. People don't know if there is such a technology. Where did the real-time special effects technology come from?

The subject matter of this book is very good, but it is too incompatible with real life. It seems like both the main character and everyone in the world are idiots.

After zooming out, it turned out to be a live broadcast. How stupid. You'll be caught and studied in less than a day

The subject matter is good, but the writing is sparse.

You can shrink so much, and you can also carry things with you to make it bigger or smaller, but the protagonist only thinks about going live? The easiest way to make money quickly is to buy a small piece of gold, then make it smaller, and then grow bigger together with the piece of gold. What is this concept? A piece of gold as big as a fingernail can be enlarged a million times according to your setting. One visit is enough for you to spend extravagantly, not to mention you can come several times. Also, can it be obtained repeatedly? Is it okay if I make it bigger once and then shrink it myself and then make it bigger again together with the gold nugget? This is a piece of gold the size of a fingernail magnified a trillion times. . . . . . . Gold is not easy to sell, so top-quality tea. Even if you get a piece of it, you can make a lot of money by enlarging it. Fortunately, the tea is sold for two and it is not easy to trace. . . . . There is nothing better than live broadcasting. Just think about it and make money. Live broadcasting is so high-profile and deeply connected with the real world without any feedback. It is really inconsistent.

Why do you want to fly with others when you slap them in the face? Others still act as if they are suffering. The protagonist still looks like he succeeded in slapping himself in the face?

There really is no way to shrink it by many times... I still have to explain it forcefully... This is how the messy meanings of words come... It is obviously wrong and the author has to create some topics, right... The subject matter is quite interesting, but I was persuaded to leave by the comment circle 🙂 It was just a fight over the book, and the author ended up explaining it randomly.

What I saw in the front was interesting, but in the back it was getting worse and worse.

The pitfalls of live streaming are a bit big! Not to mention anything else, let's just say that these live streaming glasses must have a positioning function! As long as someone has some connections and thoughts, it is easy to know the anchor's position during the live broadcast, not to mention receiving advertisements! The current Xuanwu Conference! It's a big pitfall for the anchor to pay attention to the anchor's position during the live broadcast!

Did you shrink down just for filming? ? ? Is it okay to rub the lithography machine by hand? Is it okay for you to expand your common sense and rub the chips with your hands? The layout is larger, seamless welding by hand, and high-precision machine processing. Isn't that better than filming?

Shouldn't the biggest bug be the live camera? Since the villain will be warned whenever he encounters the camera, why is the live broadcast okay?

The early stages were really good, very creative, and fun to watch, but when it came to the Five Dragons Prison episode, it was really uncomfortable to watch, and I was already poisoned to death. Friends who are interested can take a look. I am short of words and don't know how to describe it.

If it wasn't a live broadcast, I could still watch it. But with your live broadcast, you are making the audience look stupid.

A hundred times smaller is okay, but a million or something is too ridiculous. A normal person who is 1.8 Meters directly becomes a micron. What a concept. 1.8 Microns. The nucleus of a cell is not even that small. Bacteria are monsters to you.

I found a little human cartoon "Arrietty the Borrower" to recommend to everyone.

I have read more than 300 chapters, and I hope the author doesn't want the eunuchs to be unfinished. The writing is quite interesting. When writing about the little humans, it's like watching a fairy tale world.

Come on, come on! !

I like this kind of subject very much. It's a pity that the book "Human Shrinking" is unfinished. It's very interesting, but it's a pity.

Hahaha, the idea is good, but the protagonist is too kind. When writing novels, you have to know the meaning of novels. We ordinary people go to work every day, are poor, and have no achievements. We read novels to feel refreshed. It allows us ordinary people to relax and feel comfortable. Your writing is mediocre. You want the novel to be enjoyable and the protagonist is decisive in killing. You also need to have a harem. You don't need to write it in such detail. It's probably enough. This way, the character of the protagonist is established. The protagonist is a little darker. Only the protagonist can take advantage of other supporting characters. No matter how strong the supporting character is, he must be suppressed by the protagonist. Get a treasure or something. In the direct field, lower the opponent's cultivation level to the same as the protagonist.

Does anyone read this book with this title?

The creativity is very good, but the writing is average