Did they ever explain how they managed to shrink down the guests?

Did they ever explain how they managed to shrink down the guests?

from what I gather its all life-size and they just own a fuck-off huge area of land to put the park in

>he's a 1:1 fag

then explain to me how it works otherwise you massive dingus

That was Arnold's job, screencap this!

Obviously, they shrink them. It's the future. Not too inconceivable.

the creators say many times the guests can fuck or kill whoever they please.
it even disrupts that robbery where the guest shoot the guy in the neck,
now say a guest wanted to rob the saloon instead and some other dumb guest pistol whips him too hard

>he's a shrinkfag

What's it like having a garbage suspension of disbelief?

So you're telling me that they get shrunk before they board the train into the compund?
remember the episode where we see Liam McPoyle first enter the park, he steps of the futuristic train and gets to choose his hat and shit and just walks straight into the park?

nah nigga thats a lifesize park and you know it. It would be impractical to shrink guests and hosts

Seems much more plausible than the park's operators finding that much unavailable land considering the unavoidable threat of overpopulation in our future, which is their present, so 1:1 requires too much suspension of disbelief from me.

>So you're telling me that they get shrunk before they board the train into the compund
Yes.

>remember the episode where we see Liam McPoyle first enter the park, he steps of the futuristic train and gets to choose his hat and shit and just walks straight into the park?
There were plenty of cuts by that point and plenty of instances where he could have been shrunk.

>It would be impractical to shrink guests and hosts
And I consider such a park of that size in the future to be "impractical."

>There were plenty of cuts by that point and plenty of instances where he could have been shrunk
nah, they surely wouldnt have left such an important or interesting process out of the show if they DID shrink him during the cuts.

you're a faggot in denial, I cant wait for verbal confirmation in the show to prove you wrong. Probably won't get it because even a 10 year old could have figured this shit out anyway

>unavoidable threat of overpopulation in our future
>right now in the year of our lord two thousand sixteen the population growth rate is continually slowing and is expected to cap out at around nine billion
>nine billion people
>overpopulation

Again, what's it like having a garbage suspension of disbelief?

>I consider such a park of that size in the future to be "impractical."

clearly somebodys never been to disney world and seen just how much land they own for their parks

Congratulations, retard! Now everyone is aware of your autism!

At least the multiple timeframe theory has some basis

>nah, they surely wouldnt have left such an important or interesting process out of the show if they DID shrink him during the cuts.

it isn't "important". It has nothing to do with the story. They don't want to bore the audiences with technical mumbo jumbo

ohh so I guess we should just have the show as some cunt reading out the screenplay to us, excluding anything isnt plot related? God forbid the show involves anything to expand or widen the world it creates, that would be awful.

>it isn't "important". It has nothing to do with the story. They don't want to bore the audiences with technical mumbo jumbo

you absolute nigger your shrinking bullshit isn't even interesting enough for any sort of reveal and it's exactly the kind of "technical mumbo jumbo" they would spout off in early exposition. Stop being an edgy faggot and at least hop onto the bandwagon of a theory that makes a little bit of sense

>interesting process out of the show if they DID shrink him during the cuts.
It's called "stringing the audience along," just stuff the episodes with filler, especially about quests the guests are playing, and leave importance details, like how some of all of the employees are hosts, for future episodes.

if it was shrinking them down what the fuck is the point of doing construction small and not just saving the money and building the new stuff wen ur large

>is expected to cap out at around nine billion
Not sure where you heard did, but sounds like a baseless meme.

Not an argument. Also, timeframe is almost as implausible as 1:1.

No, I am saying that THIS particular thing just didn't make it into the show because they thought it would be too boring. The show already has robots that act like humans. It would probably distract from the main attraction of the robots if they would also introduce shrink rays to the audience.

oh, so not just a 1:1 fag but also a racist and homophobe. It just keeps getting better.

they probably do. Just not when guests are in the park because massive hands reaching down from the sky would be immersion breaking.

You're point against 1:1 is incoherent. Try again.

>but also a racist and homophobe.
I am a racist and homophobe, but I don't think that was apparent from anything I said, so I'm offended you think I would let that slip and not outright say it.

>He doesn't know anything about projected global population rates.

I will grant you that some experts actually think the population will cap out at a little over 10 billion sometime shortly after the turn of the century, but the more prevalent projection states that we'll peak around 9 billion in 35 years or so.

How does qt girl just show up where that robot was malfunctioning then? No car or anything.

Left = 1:1 fags
Right = Shrinkray theorists

>Right = worst Emma

Makes sense.

i never said the process would have to be explained or anything, a simple visual cue would do. But all we get is a guy getting off a train, picking up a hat and going through a door. looks fairly straightforward to me.

do shrinkfags only believe in shrinking because of the vitual map they keep showing us? do you faggots believe thats the actual size of the place? lol

that's not Emma Watson on the right. Get your eyes checked.

Well, maybe they get shrunk with the train?
It actually makes a lot of sense. Why enter the park through a train-ride? Because as they ride the train gets slowly shrunk to the appropriate size with everyone in it so it doesn't break immersion.

im willing to bet theres some kinof automated undergound system that takes them to points of interest.

we saw the old owner guy arrive in the desert from a special lift anyway so im willing to bet thats it

>implying you have any goddamn fucking clue how the technology of this future works and what they're capable of on a large scale, so you resort to some shrink ray bullshit to replace your inability to suspend your disbelief till they explain anything

because everyone in the park itself would see a fucked up train that looks massive then smaller as it gets closer

>Arnold never died, he just shrunk himself on accident
>For the past 30 years he's been riding ants around trying to get himself back to normal size

I don't think any of these estimates took into account that all diseases were cured and thus, life extended considerably for the entire population. If you can cite a study that did take this into account and still capped the population at less than 10 billion, I would like to see it.

You went to that pruned Emma thread, (which I reported), didn't you? Did it not occur to her the irony in having this picture taken considering the domestic incident she was involved in?

lol i can tell you're out of ideas fag

just you wait until some retard like you begs for an explanation at you get told its all 1:1 :3

think about it, the park could be located anywhere in the world if it was all done via shrinking

>He ranks Emma Watson below Emma Stone

extending the lifespan actually does very little for the population. the only thing that counts is fertile lifespan and number of children per woman
If you go from a society where people live from 40 to 80 without having kids to a society where people live from 40 to 120 without having kids, that basically makes the population graph lag a few years rather than increasing the rate of growth or the maximum

And given the fact that even fucking Mexico is at 2.1 children per couple, things will probably start slowing down pretty soon

Considering that all diseases have not actually been cured, your point is moot.

>fertile lifespan
Is not infertility something that can be cured?

But that has happened, at least in the universe in which Westworld takes place.

In a universe of infinite possibility, sure, infertility can be cured. Doesn't mean that such a cure actually exists.

its kinda one of those 'once its gone, its gone' type things bud

unless you freeze sperm/eggs at a high cost and lower chance at conceiving

>the shrinkray theory is memeing itself into reality

make it stop, no, please make it stop

Seems like if they could cure all diseases, they could cure that as well.

I'm being baited and I hate myself a little for being strung out this long.

it could be, but there really isn't anything remotely resembling a push for that. Most couples have their kids when they're in their 20's and 30's and are done with it. The few that don't look at IVF and surrogacy for kids and use that for one or two.

Going through the massive amount of genetic and/or hormone therapy that would be necessary to eliminate menopause seems unlikely considering no one is really clamoring for it. If anything we'll see things that lower fertility first like male birth control

>I'm being baited
>serious discussion bout shrink theory
Whatever gave you that impression?

it gets shrunken inside the tunnel.

So if people start living literally hundreds of years to the cure of all diseases, this wouldn't lead to an massive increase of the population?

Are these guys being ironic or kekking to say the guests and hosts and shrunk? It's a fuck off huge piece if desert, I'm sure the owners family has owned it for a long time else Hannibal's dad bought it 100 years ago with space billions.

What I want to know is why the fuck the hosts don't have trackers. Why did lesbro and gunbro have to hike after the suicidal host? Or helicopters?

Overpopulation has nothing to do with the literal surface area of the earth, especially not in the American desert

guys guys, what if the people inside Westworld aren't shrunken down but the people that operate Westworld are enlarged?

this seems like the cheaper solution, less staff than guests + hosts

>Overpopulation has nothing to do with the literal surface area of the earth
Well, it has something to do with it. Surely, it is possible that land could become a resource of greater scarcity than other ones.

that actually makes a lot of sense if you think about it from a cost perspective.

No. Population depends on two things: birth rate and death rate. Death rate is ultimately always 100%, so delaying it by a few years or decades doesn't change things. What causes population growth is Indians and Africans having 8 kids per couple, who then go on to have 8 kids each, and so on. Whether those kids live to be 30 or to be 120 doesn't matter, what matters is that they live long enough to pump out those kids. the rest is just lag

>so delaying it by a few years or decades doesn't change things
And I said hundreds of years, which is easily conceivable if all diseases are cured.

The human body peaks at about 115 years anyway, so the cure of all diseases is pretty irrelevant.

Not like they ever explicitly stated all disease was cured in the show, anyway.

not really, as we've cured diseases average lifespan has increased dramatically but maximum lifespan is basically untouched.
You go back to (albeit unreliable but still) records in the classical and medieval era and people living to 90 or 100 were very uncommon and it was basically the maximum. 1600's+ as records improved but the rates of disease were the same (or even higher) you still had people live to 100, 110 or so. And today with nearly perfect records and infectious diseases basically gone and nothing but diabetes, heart disease, and cancer as the big killers, 122 is still the absolute maximum.
Curing all diseases means the average lifespan moves from 80 to 100 or 110, but the maximum is still 120-130. At that point it's not disease killing you, it's just the limit of the human body. You'd need something truly radical like gene therapy reworking how you develop and how the body ages to get past that, and that's a whole new story

I hate you shrinkfags so fucking much.

>serious discussion about shrink theory

nice try retard

>The human body peaks at about 115 years anyway,
Seems like they could reverse that if it's possible to cure all diseases

>Not like they ever explicitly stated all disease was cured in the show, anyway.
"We can cure any disease, keep even the weakest of us alive, and, you know, one fine day perhaps we shall even resurrect the dead."
Pay attention.

So it's not serious? Seems like some people here are trying pretty hard for a discussion that isn't serious.

>Curing all diseases means the average lifespan moves from 80 to 100 or 110, but the maximum is still 120-130.
Source?

>Seems like

You keep saying that without providing any substantial basis other than it's just your own baseless opinion. Shut the fuck up. Goddamn sperglord shrinkfag.

>do shrinkfags only believe in shrinking because of the vitual map they keep showing us? do you faggots believe thats the actual size of the place? lol
There has to be a different reason they think that, since we literally had a scene, where it was shown that the map is holographic. (i.e. the scene where a part of the map got enlarged to zoom in on an area of interest.)

You have acknowledged the fact at how wrong you were about them not explicitly saying they've cured all disease.

Also, some people have lived beyond 115 years, so I don't see why it isn't possible for almost the entire population to do so if all diseases can be cured.

Everyone keeps saying that it's on some massive plot of land, but didn't an earlier episode claim they were 40 floors below ground?
It seemed to me like a hyper Truman show tier studio.

I explained, as diseases have been cured across history, the maximum lifespan has never really changed. The average lifespan changes a lot, your chances of getting close to the maximum lifespan improve, but the max is still the max.

People who die at 120 don't die from a disease, they die because their body is just wrecked from living that long. metabolic damage, cells having too many mistakes or too short of telomeres to divide, etc. We're evolutionarily setup to have a limited lifespan so the old generation doesn't use up the resources of the new generation. You need to fundamentally change human biology to break past 120. The best thing we can do right now is massive organ transplants from younger clones, and even that won't overcome Alzheimers and other forms of dementia

on a semi-related note, I'm still doggedly determined that Game of Thrones occurs on the inside surface of a hollow earth based on its intro.

By that logic, every time a scene cuts a character could be killed and then Jesus showed up to resurrect them, then left again, leaving the character with no memory of what just happened

>but the max is still the max.
I see no reason why this max couldn't be effectively raised once the technology to cure all diseases has been discovered.

>People who die at 120 don't die from a disease
Source? Seems they would be just as likely to die from heart disease as anyone else.

But this is the future, so it's possible shrink rays could have been invented.

Biologically 40 years is about the peak for humans. After that its all down hill. That's why women generally experience change of life at 40. In bygone millennia the average lifespan used to be about thirty five because of disease, war and so on.
Human average lifespan has actually really only gone up in the last century and a half. So therefore its only a century and half where people have generally been able to breed at a more mature age and therefore the effects of this evolutionary change will only really be felt in centuries to come.
The fact is human evolution has never had to compensate for advanced age because people generally did not live that long. At this point our own human genetics kill us in the end because no genes have ever been selected for for the trait of longevity.

>So it's not serious? Seems like some people here are trying pretty hard for a discussion that isn't serious.

oh they're serious alright, because they're supreme autists who want to feel smart

their """"""discussion"""""" just can't/shouldn't be taken seriously

I meant it's serious because they're clearly trying, and apparently not in on the joke. I guess they could be bluffing and merely pretending to be falling for the bait, but since they're clearly typing so much more, that's hardly a victory, considering the shrinkfags here have every reason to believe they're successfully baiting everyone else.

every shrinkfag poster is actually Jonathan Nolan trying to make his show seem more interesting

>I see no reason why this max couldn't be effectively raised once the technology to cure all diseases has been discovered.
Think of it this way, every day you wake up is a roll of the dice to see if something kills you. If you're lucky you survive, if you're unlucky you die. If there was no maximum age, or if the maximum age was above 120, what you'd see is that historical people living to 120 would be rare in the past when people were more "unlucky", but then with improvements in curing disease and a less violent world, the number of lucky people would increase so 130 would be the new 120, and so on.
We don't see that, we see 120 being extremely rare in the past, to rare today, but 130 has never happened. No amount of luck is going to get you to 130, you have to change the rules of the game completely.

If you want to get technical it means that lifespan is not a true Gaussian distribution, it means there is a cap at both ends so even with extreme statistical improbability you can't get past it

This to some extent, but there are points you can debate. Evolution is mainly concerned with finding enough food and reproducing, so everything else (a long and comfortable life) is not really something it cares about. However there is evidence that there are evolutionary advantages to living past 40 and selective pressure to ensure it does happen, namely having older, more experienced individuals to raise the next generation. The grandmother hypothesis is a big part of this: having experienced old women to take care of the young was so important that humans developed menopause so that grandmothers aren't distracted by their own kids but can spend their efforts raising their kids' kids (at least that's the idea, kind of hard to prove it for sure)

Not an argument.

>No amount of luck is going to get you to 130,
Well that's why they cured "ALL" diseases, so you don't have to be lucky, except not get murdered, as they probably couldn't cure having your head cut off, or overdosing on marijuana.

You're quite right!
It's a question!
Well spotted!

Considering its physically impossible to shrink people, my money is on the park being underground.

>The grandmother hypothesis is a big part of this: having experienced old women to take care of the young was so important that humans developed menopause so that grandmothers aren't distracted by their own kids but can spend their efforts raising their kids' kids (at least that's the idea, kind of hard to prove it for sure)
Yeah that makes sense. So at about (2x40) 80 years old a human generally totally packs up. Why? Humans have no really long term biological maintenance systems. Example: Advanced glycation end products. They just build up in the human body over decades until there's so much garbage in the body that new cells can't even be placed at replacement locations because of all the gunk.

...

>or overdosing on marijuana
scourge of the age

>its physically impossible to shrink people
oh? cause I say it is, see how that works made up tech can be what ever you want, fucking retard

>Overpopulation is due to running out of physical surface area on Earth and not about the zero-sum game of resource consumption
>Literal dessert land will be unavailable in the future

What's it like being a fucking idiot?

...

Inside of a hollow sphere has no gravity.

Actually, if the walls of a hollow sphere were thick enough, wouldn't they still generate gravity, only towards the centre of the crevice?

...

>why the fuck the hosts don't have trackers
If you had bothered to watch ep 5, you would have seen Elsie scanning his body and the scanner saying HMM LOOKS LIKE HIS GPS UNIT RIGHT HERE'S INACTIVE

use the color coded one pham

i cant believe you think theyre actually being shrunk. what would give you that idea?

its physically impossible, it would be stupid. you do realise that map in the main control room is a map, a representation of the actual, life sized park?

they didnt. they just made the park bigger

host are programmed to stop guests harming other gusest via the GOOD SAMARITAN reflex hardcoded into them

however accidents do happen which is why delos says they are not liable for shit that does down in the park