HOW THE ENGINE ETERNAL WORKS | Snowpiercer Lore Video

Discord: / discord It's not electrolysis.
If your comment brings up electrolysis, don't throw a fuss if it disappears. You clearly didn't read this description - much less watch the video.
+Links:
Discord: / discord
HRS: Legacy Edition: / @hrslegacyedition6808
HR Studios: / @hallimarrathlornstudios
Previous Video: • BIG ALICE VS SNOWPIERC...
00:00 Skit
00:28 Disclaimers and Initial Proofs
01:10 Initiating Question
01:25 The Turbine
01:54 The Starting Fuse
02:18 The Startup Process
04:15 The Motors
04:49 Outside Conditions
05:03 Going Uphill
06:12 Going Above Capacity
05:57 Going Below Capacity
08:19 The Meltdown Potential
08:37 The Fact of Life Support
09:12 The Uneternal Engine
10:21 Differing Engineer Doctrines
10:56 Outro

[@crash4267]

I think in one episode where they had to cut Snowpiercer below 15 cars. And they had the train stopped to check for samples of the snow, the engine was just frying itself

[@Inteligento579]

They mentioned that the Engine was designed to support and power a 1001 cars, not 15. However even at minimal output it was still producing too much power. Therfore it needed to dump it by heat or high speeds.

[@psammiad]

A problem: if a perpetual motion generator had been invented, why didn't they use it to power cities and facilities which were stationary instead of on a train?

[@capnbilll2913]

The planet was unlivable. The train moved in a giant loop to stay on the warmer side.

[@joshuamaruffi2599]

The engine’s design by nature needed to be moving to work, so it couldn’t just stay still.

[@VecheslavNovikov]

@@capnbilll2913 That's silly, just use the infinite energy to run heaters in the train instead of the wheels.

[@glaticstorm32]

Because you wouldn’t have a story… like pacific rim, why build big robots when you could just make automated turrets with the energy weapons used on the robots ? Because you wouldn’t have cool story lol

[@freaky1382]

because it needed to be moving to function and unless you’re gonna pull a mortal engines moment you can’t get a city to move

[@GageisGreat12]

So what I’ve gathered is while yes, a perpetual motion engine would allow Snowpiercer to theoretically last forever, any changes to operating speed, power output, or ceasing of movement entirely could be disastrous. It’s actually really smart if you think about it, I’m surprised the show writers didn’t use a weakness like this to their advantage.

[@johnfeistner467]

A clutch system and transmission solves this wonderfully, assuming that changes in torque dont affect then engine in which case hills would be a major issue

[@carlosandleon]

@@johnfeistner467it’s a train, they would have flattened out the major obstacles for the tracks.

[@Tuberuser187]

Or you know, make a massive particle accelerator shaped rail loop, G-Forces would be irrelevant without people and add extremely resistive induction loops into the track to generate energy and moderate the spinny engines velocity and bingo, energy crisis are no more and you can generate endless amounts of heat to deal with the cold. Start a mega project of building hundreds of thousands and you can start thinking about orbital power transfers, momentum harvesters etc and start changing the amount of energy in the Earths orbit of the Sun and warm the world. Thats how dumb this idea is, its broken for its intended purpose, the plot demands eternal unstoppable choo choo so they end up with a plot device that solves the obstacle it was supposed to defeat in much more sensible ways. It's not about realism, its about world building.

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

@Tuberuser187 The plot doesn't demand an unstoppable train tho - the plot relies on Snowpiercer not being truly perpetual, despite what her passengers desire. The plot *relies* on Snowpiercer breaking down and slowing with time, because there is no perpetual motion just like there is no perfect savior from the Freeze - it's meant to be an analogy for how Wilford is *not* a god.

[@Tuberuser187]

@@HallimarRathlornStudios Fair enough, I do admit I have some bias in the way I didn't enjoy the movie at all.

[@Matt47247523457]

Ah yes, same principle as the turbo encabulator

[@MrROTD]

Yes it uses the fuckulator to excite the astrobastards, therefore enabling the turbo encabulator.

[@jbrou123]

Kinda, but this train doesn't use spurving bearings or differential girdlesprings.

[@PastaWeasel]

@@jbrou123 and the lunar wane shaft seemed to be missing

[@thetoasterisonfire2080]

They could have slapped a fusion reactor on the train and called it a day but no whoever wrote the story went for perpetual motion, motor turning generator style. Literally the only thing stoping me from properly watching the show. Probably has to do with me being an electrical engineer or aunt karen at the family dinner asking me why we don’t just use the free energy machine she saw on Facebook to power our homes. But now any mention of infinite energy or perpetual motion makes me unreasonably angry. Engineer rant over and back to designing a led controller for my hot tub.

[@WillDa713]

Well, the original comic book from 1982 (and subsequent adaptations) tend to focus more on the social and environmental aspects of the story, more than the scifi details that are part of the setting. It came out in the era of Métal Hurlant, so dope ass visuals and a strong story was more important to the original creators than scientific realism. That being said you really should give the show a chance, it's pretty decent. If you want a Good Snowpiercer Experience, go for the Bong Joon Ho movie or straight up read the og comic book online it's a ride and a half ;)

[@carlosandleon]

I think the machine operating on perpetual motion is integral to the story. It’s the one gimmick that sets the rest of the story off. At least in the movie, the train should keep moving to keep the system going.

[@blahfasel2000]

@@carlosandleon You could easily have that with a fusion reactor. Say the reactor has to run at a minimum power level, below that the reaction becomes unstable and it has to be shut down for safety (this is actually an issue with real-life fission reactors, running below safe power levels was basically what doomed Chernobyl). The reactor gives off copious amounts of waste heat which can only be dumped while the train is moving. And restarting the reactor after a shutdown requires infrastructure that isn't on the train itself, only at the starting station. Now you have your train that cannot stop (or only for limited amounts of time before the reactor overheats, similar to what they do in the series with the batteries running down) without needing to resort to some physics defying perpetual motion mumbo-jumbo.

[@qwertykeyboard5901]

It also seems like the writers forgot about transmissions.

[@RandoWisLuL]

@@blahfasel2000 Chernobyl and this show similarities completely stop at the " too low power levels" thing. Reactor could have been stopped and restarted fine if they weren't to incompetent. Reactor 4 also didnt have that " we are running too low, we will overheat" issue like in this show, it was the ingestion of Zenon gas and incompetence. My question is why not just add two or three perpetual motion engines to this system and ditch the silly trail wheel generators or keep the wheel generators but dont make them vital to travel? They stated that the engine doesn't have enough power to even keep it alive when its stopped. You could shut down Mutiple engines as you need them. Hell, the design could have called for waste heat system with 1000 cars and such. Make it 1100 cars and deal with it.

[@joshuamaruffi2599]

I think a good way to get around this maintenance problem is to have a maintenance car with a few high- tech 3D printers. There are 3D printers that can make pretty much anything now, even some that can work in different materials. So if you put a few of these in the train, you can use them to print engine parts, motors, new wheels, computer parts, and even new 3D printers when the old ones wear down. Then, just replace the old parts with new stuff (stopping of course for exterior repairs), and the train can basically last as long as it needs to. You might even be able to deploy the Pirate Train or Not- As- Big Alice to repair damaged parts of the rails. Then just have a refinery to turn the old stuff back into filliment for the printers. Even if this isn’t a perfectly closed system (I can imagine those wheels will grind down), you can probably stop once every few decades to pick up an old car to scrap.

[@chaomatic5328]

While the explanation skips a few questions (IE. Why can't you use reserve batteries to start the turbine, why even use a train cut out from the outside world at all, how do you stall the turbine, how does the train system make the turbine create more energy and etc), I really like how good looking the presentation was. The Minecraft demonstration in peculiar was really nice with the little edits with the glowing batteries and train on an incline. My main problem with the snowpiercer show, is that by making things more rational, it takes the more poetic or metaphoric parts away. The original comic did that well, and the movie VERY well. If you do want a world of trains with the logic cranked to 11, I'd suggest La Compagnie des Glaces by G.J. Arnaud. I don't know if there is an English version of it, but boy is the universe extensive, albeit it skipped on how people thought living entirely within trains would be a good idea. Anyway, this série is LONG, clocking in at over 60 books over 20 years of writing. I began around 4 months ago and is still at the 8th book :>

[@ajs-aaronsavage6197]

That was a really good video. To the point, easy to understand and well produced. Keep it up man :))

[@SomeKidd777]

That was an exemplotory explanation and very well thought out. I'm still bummed out that the shows ending, but I'm eagerly waiting for a reboot.

[@samkennedy7081]

We reeeallly need a reboot. I wanna see how other people are surviving outside of trains and what the world was like before and during the Freeze. And What Wilford Industries looked like on Earth.

[@sharpe227]

@@samkennedy7081 why reboot a show that couldnt make it through 4 seasons.

[@samkennedy7081]

@@sharpe227 Cause many people enjoy it and are invested in the characters. You clearly don’t care about the show or the characters so my advice would be stop wasting ur time like this. It’s weird

[@steamtrainrollon2060]

4:35 when he was taking about the motors powering the wheel I said “oh it is a traction motor”

[@Battleshipfan]

could the train last longer if a lot of the components that keep it eternal were either stored in mass or being built in mass onboard ?

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

Yep, and that's why Bennett wanted Big Alice to catch Snowpiercer. Cause Big Alice had massive storages full of parts, so the train could last longer.

[@Kaiju515]

Big Alice was said to be a supply train and most likely for Snowpiercer itself because it too runs on perpetual motion and has an actual docking car for Snowpiercer. With how Snowpiercer in the show itself lasted for seven full long years as it did without the proper replacement parts, YES, It could last a lot longer than it is currently doing with proper part replacements and maintenance with the help of Big Alice from time to time. Preserving the train for several more years. In this scenario, if Big Alice was properly tasked as a supply train for Snowpiercer without being commanded by Wilford. Big Alice can scour the rest of the world in order to scavenge for more parts from other facilities of Wilford Industries. With its very light electrical load with its 40 cars, Big Alice has potential to remain stationary for long periods of time without running out of power, which is long enough for the crew to scavenge and get moving again. If Big Alice does not somehow got derailed along the way and have proper long-term communication with Snowpiercer, both trains could meet up at a certain location in their voyage, dock, resupply on food, parts, perform maintenance, and swap crew members. It would lead to an efficient cycle that would preserve both trains ten-fold. Ensuring the survival of both trains and all life on them until the slightest possible chance there is a warm spot for recolonization. At least that is my theory in terms of show canon and information from the show itself.

[@getout455]

​@@HallimarRathlornStudiosidk

[@CODTerracraft]

@@Kaiju515I love it

[@Killerean]

Had it been in reality, the very first major issue the train would face would be the wear and tear on the wheels. Unlike pretty much any engine parts, wheels are bare metal on metal contact, no lubrication, no mercy. Even though the train won't necessarily grind to a halt, the deformation of the wheel surfaces will eventually chuck it straight where it should have made a turn. And if you happen to run in a single loop of a track, it could also be the track that eventually wears out and gives. So sooner or later, there will be an external part out of control of the crew that would give.

[@blahfasel2000]

The track would eventually give out, but it should last far longer than the wheels. In real life train wheels last for about 200-400,000 km, in some cases even 1 million km, before they need retreading on a wheel lathe (dynamic effects cause train wheels to wear unevenly in a process called polygonisation; this causes vibrations and eventually makes the wheels unsafe as they literally start jumping on the tracks). In Snowpiercer that's 2-4, maybe 8 revolutions of the track (one revolution is about 120,000 km from what I can find), or 1-3 years. At the beginning of the series they're in year 6 and the 19th revolution, so the wheels should have needed at least two overhauls. It may be conceivable that they have a way to retread the wheels while the train is running, but even with that the wheels would still only last for maybe 1-2.5 million km or so at most (at that point real life train wheels - after several retreadings - have lost 4-5 cm of material and the wheel rims become to thin to safely support the loads), ie. at the point of the series the wheels should be on their last legs. Similar for the movie (they're in year 17 there, but in the movie the train only makes one revolution per year, so the distance travelled is roughly similar). Tracks in real life on the other hand are easily good for decades, especially if a train comes through only three times a year. Having an extensive globe spanning track loop works in their favour here.

[@Devminny]

Cool, but i have to say something. In one episode when the air/snow vent broke (was broken by icy guy in s2) they said that engine can't take any more hydrogen that says it needs fuel (hydrogen) and it's not totally a perpetual motion. It can be close but not entirely perpetual. Other than this great explanation

[@timobensch3904]

It would still be perpetual motion in a sense. It gets the hydrogen from the water/snow via electrolysis. But electeolosys of water takes a lot of Energy and you can't get more energy out of the hydrogen, than you put into splitting the water. Even if you burn it with extra oxygen from the air, you'd just get the same amoint if water and energy gets lost as heat. And if you do it like current hydrogen feuel cells do it in hydrogen cars, you'd get less heat but ultimately due to electrical resistance in the cables you'd still end up getting kess electricity out of it than you put in. And i am pretty sure having some motors turning and moving the train and having Others being turned by the moving of the train and generating electricity would also end up not generating as much electricity back as is being spend. So overall the explanation in the series is still missing a piece that allows for the train to gain extra electricity. Maybe, idk, solar cells and some wind turbines *could* make up for the last bit of extra electricity needed, but i don't think it'd actually be possible to fully close that gap

[@sjuas690]

Surely any short comings of the system can simply be overcome with some more perpetual motion magic!

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

Unfortunately, no matter how much the characters in the show try, those shortcomings cannot be overcome. Each year, the system lags behind more and more from the engine just running out of momentum, and the parts on the train and the tracks decaying over time. It's actually a big part of the show's plot.

[@Kaiju515]

What an amazing explanation! Made perfect sense in terms of fictional engineering and the lore of the show and the franchise as a whole, and how the car wheels, bogie motors, track conditions, and even life support systems play a part to the perpetual motion engine. Thank you so much Hallimar Rathlorn Studios, keep up the good work! Your previous Snowpiercer Engine video was so interesting in its concepts that it kept me very interested and gave me the urge to ask more questions about those concepts in your personal lore of the franchise and the concepts of the perpetual motion engine. I am really glad that I got to see your videos, for they were amazing in their explanations to an engineering marvel that can only be possible in fantasy, because of physics. Thank you fellow fan of Snowpiercer and continue rattling along with the franchise.

[@6nok18]

Good job engineeer.

[@qwertykeyboard5901]

Lol, writing about the train being nuclear would've been easier. "It takes heat from radioactive decay to boil water/feed thermoelectric generators."

[@MegaLokopo]

Realistically it would simply use the papp engine, in other words nuclear fusion and fission at the same time, stretching the protons neutrons and electrons as little as possible to create energy.

[@felixpoventud3914]

Thank you! We will stay warm!! High hopes! The engine will previe!

[@scottysgarage4393]

The entire concept, train, purpose, all of it, is too absurd to deserve a serious analysis.

[@samkennedy7081]

Snowpiercer content is rare and very hard to find. Especially good Snowpiercer content. And you have delivered both. Would love to see more and keep doing what ur doing :) The Engine Will Provide!

[@theworkshopwhisperer.5902]

I really like snowpiercer and the eternal engine as a plot device rather than practical science. It's a strange technology with strange wims that are difficult to keep on top of without access to the advanced industry that created it. If you have this technology why not put it in a bunker in a far more controlled environment and bit rebuild humanity from there? If the big crunch is always running out of power then why don't you have some RTG's on board. Free heating and energy for everyone zero maintenance requirement? Backup diesel generators or advanced solar panels to restart the train. The colder solar panels are the more efficient they are. Considering the advanced technology available during construction why not a miniaturised atomic power plant on rails?

[@TheLonelyLurker1995]

I love your explanation! Good job. It's kinda saddening that mankind can't create Perpetual motion engine that could actually last, perpetually.

[@nathanhudson-young2460]

From what I've read, if the engine was properly maintained, it could theoretically run for decades before dying out. But it would still be impossible if the train had 1001 cars.

[@WackoMcGoose]

So basically, Snowpiercer is a live-action "we have Infinity Train at home" series, minus the magic hand-numbers and ability to _get off_ the train. Seems legit.

[@solidaridadjusticia1438]

Snow parachute was not exactly based on something to eat. Train snow piercer originally came before it in the first movie in 2013

[@pavelslama5543]

As a fan of train and railway transportation, this show just absolutely drives me mad. The amount of BS, starting with zero maintenance tracks and zero maintenance bogeys, and ending with having an anti-entropy device, yet using it as a glorified generator is just mindboggling.

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

There isn't zero track maintenance - the rails have degraded over time and they've been forced to change routes before. There isn't zero maintenance on the bogeys - one of them was severely damaged when its motor blew out and it was a big episode plot where they had to stop the car from derailing and taking the entire train with them. The perpetual motion engine isn't anti-entropy because, though it's not any real power source, the perpetual motion engine is FAR from *perpetual*; it's talked about many times, especially in season one, how the train is losing energy and decaying from the lack of replacement parts.

[@jorge8596]

You literally say in this video that they take power from the wheels to power... the wheels. That's literally the definition of anti-entropy

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

@@jorge8596 Did I say it was 100% efficient? Did you not watch the show and see the conversation about how the train is running behind by a few days every year? Or are you just one of dozens of people commenting and complaining about a show that they *never* watched?

[@hypatia-du-bois-marie]

i remember at one tv version episode they mentioned hydrogen intake, so i'd assume it's a fusion reactor? (as in it's not really the impossible perpetual motion machine as in thermodynamics, but just a reactor that when on earth with hydrogen simply able to run for astronomical times

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

Yeahh, that is true that they mentioned hydrogen, but they claimed it was for electrolysis, not fusion. But it doesn't matter either way since the train never actually behaves like it's powered by snow and they never mention the intakes at any point before or since that episode.

[@tobias373]

Hello, I didn't understand the explanation well, I don't understand how there can be something perpetual and that I can supply 1001 wagons. If you could explain it to me briefly I would appreciate it because it is not very clear to me.

[@embgb21emb86]

great video!

[@bryceguidry1252]

Great video

[@elitewolfzz567]

The vsauce music goes so hard

[@georgesgamingchannel2696]

The fact you used minecraft (or mineimator) to do the visuals of the video is both clever, original, and somewhat funny and ridiculous. And a side note, do not over use the word however.

[@CoHostColby1]

Goodnight, Snowpiercer, and long may you roll.

[@Kaiju515]

Hallimar Rathlorn Studios, is it possible that I can utilize your theory on the perpetual motion engine and how it works? for I am writing my own Snowpiercer story and I want to explain how the Eternal Engine operates in a manner that makes sense. For the Eternal Engine was never properly explained in the movie nor the show since the engine itself played an essential part in the franchise, and your explanation was amazing and is suitable in terms of modern engineering, for the Freeze takes place in a post-apocalyptic modern world. If I am allowed, I will be very grateful! 😃

[@samkennedy7081]

A Snowpiercer book is definitely a must for the franchise.👍

[@Kaiju515]

@@samkennedy7081 Thank you, I'll try my best! Though it might take a while until I complete the first chapter. For I am planning on putting in several different characters and story concepts from the show, movie, and graphic novels into one. To create a expansive story with concrete lore, well-meaningful messages that those like the movie are trying to deliver, and beloved characters that have actual personality and are important to the plot.

[@stianthomassen6693]

Well, there is something moving...the earth. Perpetual motion machines are impossible, but what if this thing somehow taps into the Earths rotating energy somehow, either with the magnetic field or the rotation it self? Maybe the moon? Not as a main source, but as that extra push. Could explain why it goes around the world.

[@Shipwright1918]

Begs the question of why the engine has drive rods and pistons like an old fashioned steam locomotive. Perhaps some of the hydrogen is used to make steam to drive these, then instead of being exhausted out into the atmosphere the exhaust steam is piped down the train for heat and eventually condensed into water.

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

The drive rods were aesthetic. Drive rods tend to require significant maintenance, so they wouldn't really fit into the idea of Snowpiercer being able to last decades without issue. Not to mention that, as I've said in the video, the hydrogen-powered train concept was only ever used in one episode while the train remained the "eternal engine" for every other episode. It is clear the idea of taking in snow was only ever a plot device that never really had any bearing on the actual lore.

[@Shipwright1918]

Aesthetic drive rods don't make a lot of sense, as they would be adding weight to the drive train unneccesarily with no benefit and there are still moving parts that will wear down. Needless to say they could do a lot of damage if they ever seized or broke. If you're gonna have 'em, and apparently the Snowpiercer has two sets of 10 coupled wheels with rods front and back, it makes sense to power them. Roller bearings and mechanical lubrication would go a long way to making such a setup last a long time without major maintenance, a reciprocating steam plant tends to do fewer rpms after all. Even if it's just a side effect of the main power system, having steam would have a lot of practical side-effects. Propulsion, heat, hot and cold water. From my watch-through of the show, the "Eternal Engine" is a bit of misnomer, as it's really the fuel that's endless with all the snow around to extract the hydrogen from. Practically speaking the system "could" run endlessly, but sooner or later our old pal friction is going to win and wear something out. I would also suspect Wilford of hyping up the "Eternal Engine" part as it would make him seem even more worthy of admiration and so on, as he was all about power and control.

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

@@Shipwright1918 As I said. The concept of the train needing external fuel was invented for one episode and never touched on again. The train 96% of the episodes is held back by the need for labor and parts to keep in running (which is the real reason why it's not eternal), not hydrogen for fuel. And aesthetic drive rods make total sense. What makes more sense? Making your engine reminiscent of classical steam locomotives because they look nice (keep in mind SP was not DESIGNED for the freeze initially) or having two separate motive systems inside of a giant train, steam and electric. The most probable answer to a question is always the simplest one. And the answer is that the drive rods are aesthetic and the hydrogen plotline was completely contrived by writers in a single episode that would never mention hydrogen ever again, continuing to refer to it as "the engine", "the engine eternal" and/or "the perpetual motion engine" every episode afterward. And every single one before it.

[@Shipwright1918]

​@@HallimarRathlornStudios It may have only been used once, but the hydrogen was never specifically retconned out either, so it needs to be accounted for even if it might be inconvenient. The simplest answer for the rods is probably the show's production team thought they looked cool, which I will readily agree to, but from an engineering standpoint it makes absolutely no sense to have big driving wheels, big cylinders, and driving rods purely for show. I mentioned weight before, the big thing here is hammer blow and combined reciprocating weight. All the metal in those rods, crankpins, etc. are very heavy, and even though they're counterbalanced with weights in the wheels all that mass swinging around delivers a thump with each turn of the wheels. One big one going down onto the rails (hammer blow) and a shuttling motion forwards and backwards (combined reciprocating weight). The big point point here is all this thumping can be hard on the track, if it's excessive it can even break the rails. Most modern locomotives, particularly ones meant to go fast like Snowpiercer, don't have driving rods for this reason. Since it has 'em, we could try to chalk it up in-universe to Wilford being an eccentric rich guy and Melanie being an idiot or too scared to call him on why it'd be a bad idea. Trouble is, it doesn't fit their characters, both are pretty sharp engineers, so I'd wager they'd know all about hammer blow and made the system double-redundant by having a steam circuit in addition to the main power system to make them functional. Might as well get some extra oomph to drive the train in tradeoff for the thumping of all the weight. Doesn't really change much insofar as the lore is concerned, at least how I see it.

[@triage2962]

@@HallimarRathlornStudios The big flaw is that weels and tracks tend to break in cold conditions so this train would not run for long.

[@nightmantis5154]

There might be Another engine that turns on when the other engine is having maintenance done.

[@YukoFurry]

It was really nice to see minecraft being used to teach this x)

[@gdj777]

I thought it was just more kids pushing it round and round.

[@nathanhudson-young2460]

I wonder if this engine can actually be built. If so, could it work?

[@friedrich878]

The engine actually isnt a perpetual motion engine it’s actually powerd by hydrogen (as said in s2, in the episode where the snow intake was broken) but we still couldn’t build it now because we can’t produce/convert hydrogen efficient enough

[@nathanhudson-young2460]

@@friedrich878 I know

[@jorge8596]

No

[@kurtdestinova]

Grows exponentially but leaves out friction?

[@dylanculpepper7080]

If big alice can remain stationary longer than snowpiercer can why did wilford start big alice In the beginning of season 2 couldn't he have just waited for the rest of snowpiercer to freeze and then board the train and if wilford had some idea how the train worked why did he allow melanie and Bennet to be engineers if he could pilot the train himself because he was the Only person who knew who the trains worked when he was abandoned and was able to retrofit big alice. Ps I also like how when you talked about people wanting it to be actual science my name popped up

[@Kaiju515]

It would've been possible for Wilford to have Big Alice to stay connected to Snowpiercer until its systems are chocked out and everybody dies of the cold. it is even stated by Wilford himself in the show that "me and my crew know life below zero", so he and his crew could've survived if they have done that, but the issue could've been to move the entire train again in time until both trains run out of power and everyone dies. Big Alice does have enough power and traction to stop Snowpiercer to a full stop and push her forward again for the engine to begin generating energy again once in motion. But if the engine completely dies, it might need a proper restart which will be difficult to perform in one sitting. For Snowpiercer is ten miles long (or 43 miles long to other calculation) and the sub-train is out. Crew or other engineers such as Wilford will not be able to reach the engine in time to initiate the proper restart until Big Alice is unable to push Snowpiercer enough to provide enough motion for energy to be generated in order to reignite the system. Big Alice struggled to pull over 1,024 cars in season 3 and it was said in season 2 that Big Alice will only be able to push Snowpiercer at proper speed long enough for the energy restart to be properly completed, and Snowpiercer will start moving on her own again and lessen the burden on Big Alice. So the biggest issue in this possible scenario is (as this video also said) Time. Big Alice might remain stationary far longer than Snowpiercer due to the small electrical load, but she cannot remain stationary nor push the entirety of Snowpiercer by herself forever, and it might take hours to reach the engine for a proper restart until the burden becomes too great and Big Alice grinds to a halt due to the weight. So to not risk his crew and his life, Wilford decided to start Big Alice again when the Docking cars are permanently disconnected in the beginning in Season 2, ensuring his and his crew's survival in that situation so he can try to claim Snowpiercer another day in a manner that he has complete control in. Now for the reason for why he allows Engineers such as Bennett or Javi to live and work under him is because they know how the train works just as much as he does, or at least to the extent that is necessary for efficiency. But the most important reason is because he wanted to live his life in luxury as much as possible, so he wanted others to take in the responsibility of maintaining the Eternal Engine so he doesn't have to do it himself and he can relax and drink all the booze he wants.

[@dylanculpepper7080]

@@Kaiju515 the reason for big alice having to move makes sense but big alice started out with 43 cats as stated by Alex but wilford disconnected them so why couldn't he have disconnected some of big Alice's cars

[@Kaiju515]

@@dylanculpepper7080 Because if he disconnected more cars then not only will there be less space, but also some of the cars with the parts of snowpiercer might get frozen and lost. Also the electrical load of Big Alice might become so light that her engine will be on a constant threat of melting down like that of the Snowpirate train at the beginning of Season 3. Plus disconnecting cars was a complicated process for Snowpiercer with only a few Link-junctions on certain areas, so it might be the same for Big Alice. And with Big Alice being 20 times shorter than Snowpiercer, there might be only one or two link-junctions that are available that hold a couple cars each. So it would've been more detrimental to uncouple more cars from Big Alice, in terms of time of uncoupling them and the potential threat of meltdown due to the extremely light electrical load.

[@dylanculpepper7080]

@@Kaiju515 but big alice was retrofitted and she had more capabilities than snowpiercer so wouldn't her electrical load be able to change

[@Kaiju515]

​@@dylanculpepper7080 True, she was outfitted to have some more capabilities than Snowpiercer, such as: having a booster/gear shift for a temporary increase in acceleration, more traction, docking car with cold valve security, up-link, is a push-pull engine, and most importantly, Low-Torque. but other than that, we don't know much else on how Big Alice has been retrofitted, nor was the Booster properly explained. Also, Big Alice is the PROTOTYPE of Snowpiercer, which means her Engine is a prototype of the Eternal Engine as well, which means that her engine can have different pros and cons than the perfected engine, probably more flaws than necessary. This is why Melanie and Ben were surprised that she was even running at all at her reveal in Season 1, for her engine was unable to work on the night of departure at the beginning of the Freeze. Because her engine was a prototype, old, and probably had a bunch of flaws. For Big Alice's engine to work, Wilford either had to fix the problems that her original engine had to begin with, or replaced it with one of the perfected perpetual motion engine's that were in development and ready to be installed. For Snowpiercer can't be the only train with perpetual motion (Unless Wilford was planning on building other Perpetual Trains before the Freeze) If Big Alice still held her original engine, that it might have a higher risk of melting down from the near non-existent electrical load, or suffer other problems because of it due to ending up generating more power than necessary because of the light load. If she had a perpetual motion engine that is just as new as Snowpiercer's and has about the same level of efficiency as her sister, than she would have the same level of risk that Snowpirate had in season 3, due to almost being at the same level of cars if possible.

[@thefatprotocanine]

for a moment, i thought it was electric but on the future seasons i saw hints that the train was maybe powered by an hydrogen engine! hydrogen or something like that, since it had A MOTOR powering it all but now i thought of it it doesnt make much sense but... why having a scene including the heart of this iron snake, but what powers it

[@fruitpunk]

ok so i love the movie and this appeared on my feed, i clicked expecting something about the movie only to learn theres a show?? how have i not heard about this?

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

The show was never really that big and because the community is split between liking the show and despising the show, word of mouth hasn't really traveled either. I personally think the show is more entertaining, but it doesn't handle the messaging as well as the movie - which is superior. Snowpiercer TV has declined since 2020, especially when the show's been canceled.

[@Eternal-engineer.96]

Who thinks snowpircer needs season four

[@martinp1054]

I still don't understand why you do not like the electrolysis answer..... i would think electrolysis + nuclear fusion is a eternal engine as well as a perpetual motion one..... because if it stops moving, it will no longer get more snow/ice/water to make into hydrogen......

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

Because the electrolysis answer fails to explain how the engine eternal was at constant risk of meltdown when stopping in Season 3; it fails to explain why the engine was ALWAYS in surplus, even when not moving for long periods of time.

[@VecheslavNovikov]

@@HallimarRathlornStudios Pretty simple. The reactor produces a lot of energy and can't be throttled down that far. So either the energy is used or it builds up. Or you shut it down, but then everyone dies.

[@Palemagpie]

"someday we will all die for want of a Hexnut"

[@Neumonics429]

At least in the movie, I feel like the idea was that the Eternal Engine didn't work, it was in no way perpetual, it was this false belief that the engine was magical and would continue forever. An analogy to the idea that society will always progress with zero effort and zero sacrifice. Its a good, well produced video though, don't get me wrong.

[@Super_Squirrel]

First of all, amazing video, very well explained in visualised! I do have one question, what is your thought about the engine's hydrogen production? It has been a while since I watched the series (waiting for the next season), but iirc, in one episode, the one where Snowpiercer have issues with water pressure, they hint towards hydrogen production might be important to the engine In the episode they experience a critical failure with some of the engine's computer system, which leads to all hydrogen production being suspended, if I remember correctly, which then leads to Wilford remarking that the engine would fail on them, in minutes, if they don't do something to fix it, thus implying the importance of the hydrogen production. Your video is absolutely amazing! I was just curious to hear your thoughts on this.

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

This may sound lazy, but I don't regard the hydrogen thing as canon. For most of the show up until that point, the engine has always been the perpetual motion engine. It has never needed snow to function. Then the hydrogen episode happens, and then hydrogen is never mentioned again afterward. The engine's problems are always tied to parts, not snow intake. So I believe that the season 2 storyline was made up by the writers without regard for the long-term effects of the story. You can tell this is the case in season three, when the engine is at risk of melting down if it doesn't move because it's producing too much energy. If the train needs snow (hydrogen) to operate and produce power, why would producing energy me an issue if the train isn't moving? Especially if it's a reactor or electrolysis where throttling the engine would very likely be a thing. But it IS a problem. But cause the engine isn't a reactor or a hydrogen-eating machine that can easily be controlled. It has a fixed, perpetual output that simply cannot be gotten rid of.

[@Super_Squirrel]

Ah, I see, thank you so much! I don't really have an education with all of this, so I was just curious to hear your thoughts on the hydrogen thing. Thank you so much for your time!

[@phroogo...]

I thought it just used a compact nuclear engine.

[@Vinnocentus]

Im sorry, I havent watched Snowpiercer yet, but why wouldnt they just use this engine in a settlement like in the game Frostpunk?

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

From what the show says, it's because holding still would freeze ANYTHING solid, at least in the beginning. Being exposed to open air was immediately lethal, no matter almost anything else.

[@Vinnocentus]

@@HallimarRathlornStudios With that logic, wouldnt building it underground work(similar to how dwarves in alot of fantasy settings live)? Also, good vid, understood most of what you explained

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

@@Vinnocentus I presume living underground would've been the best option, however, given my understanding of the lore, there wasn't that much time to build giant bunkers and whatnot capable of lasting for very long. What Wilford did already have was a massive system of track and a train that could survive for, theoretically, centuries. In terms of the best improvised solution to surviving the Freeze, Snowpiercer was really the best option.

[@Vinnocentus]

@@HallimarRathlornStudios Cool to know! Thanks for explaining!

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

@Vinnocentus You might not care too much, but your question has stuck with me so much these past few days that I've decided to make a video on it - it was just such an honest question that could use a good explanation, and you being so honest about not seeing the show left a very good impression - too many people make ignorant questions and jabs at the show (like how the train runs on perpetual motion and then people go off and complain about how impossible that is and how the movie was so much better because the perpetual motion wasn't real, even though the perpetual motion isn't real in the show either). But your question was honest and open so I'm going to make a video addressing it for those who might also share it. Because it is a good question: Why *didn't* they do something other than a train?

[@Justanormaldude21]

Im just confused how a single eternal engime could carry 1001 passenger coach

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

It doesn't. The engine is just a sci-fi power generator. Every car has its own motors that move each car.

[@Justanormaldude21]

@@HallimarRathlornStudios Google didn't said it has every motor on each

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

@@Justanormaldude21 Every car has a motors at each wheel. There's an entire episode in the first season about how a motor gets blown out.

[@Justanormaldude21]

@@HallimarRathlornStudios im more of a skip person🥲🥲

[@paulfoxanimator]

oh i see u have use mine-imator, nice dude~

[@Jimmy_CV]

idc about the method of generating power. My question is how tf is track maintenance possible in this show

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

Most track maintenance isn't necessary since each individual section of track only gets used twice a year or so, and where there is a need to repair tracks or clear them, it's shown in the show that the train can either divert route or stop at the site and drop some people off for repairs and go into reverse until they can go forward again and pick the people up on the cleared track. Tracks DO indeed need maintenance after a certain amount of seasons of warping and usage, but the tracks in Snowpiercer aren't being warped because there are no more seasons and traffic is just SO low compared to what we have IRL. And then there's also the cheap idea that "they're just built better" too. So there's a lotta factors.

[@Ethan_chmieleski13]

Do you have Discord, if so can you put a link please.

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

There is a link in the description for that.

[@outlawdingo3020]

The movie was better than the series. The series was still good but yeah I'd watch the movie again

[@sadprivatepyle7536]

How does the train not need to be stopped for part changing

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

As described in the show, the train has a large supply of spare parts - all of which are low maintenance to begin with. In the earlier seasons, much of the plot is driven by how finite spare parts are and how costly maintenance is.

[@622wesc]

You know nuclear energy would actually work. And you would heat the cars with the cooling water.

[@Juke-Redlin]

*checks comments* THERE WAS A SHOW???

[@stephenboyd490]

What happened to doing something new? I’m not unhappy with this video it’s just I thought doing something new was the new. Keep doing what you do.

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

I mean, this may still be SP stuff, but it's not much like what I was doing before. Either way, most of the reason I did this was because I kept getting questions in comments about the lore/info in question.

[@heisenballs]

Probably powered by candy.

[@cdfgjrvbdjhvjdr2429]

MINECRAFT PART

[@stavinaircaeruleum2275]

I thought for the show they just chopped the movie into small bits

[@user-xv6sm7mr7y]

What about nuclear power

[@user-wo4hb4zi5y]

PYLE YINE 😎

[@johnbees4443]

Ah yes

[@MrROTD]

LOL theres no free energy from regeneration and batteries.

[@pmsteamrailroading]

Science-fiction where the science doesn’t hold up, is bad science-fiction. Excuses can be made for things done in the 50s where they didn’t know what Venus was like. But at the time Snowpiercer was done, everyone knew perpetual motion was impossible. This made it bad science-fiction then, and bad science-fiction today. Never watched a single episode or the movie never picked up the books and am completely happy I didn’t. The five minutes of this video I did watch, are five minutes I don’t get back.

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

Then why are you bothering with these videos at all? The point of perpetual motion engine is to serve as a MacGuffin for human greed and evil, especially in the movie, which is a masterpiece of cinema that shows how evil and all-consuming a system can be when it's elevated to a god status. In the case of the film, people will do whatever it takes to justify an evil system and will never think about any alternative because those at the top are "such *great* visionaries" who cannot be challenged. This cult of personality and ideology all but hides away the simple fact that, in both the show and the film, the perpetual motion engine is not actually perpetual at all. No matter how much it tries to stretch and bend the law prohibiting eternal energy, it never succeeds in breaking it, resulting in the TV train slowly losing more time and energy with every year. In the show, the perpetual motion engine serves as an even greater MacGuffin (as apposed to just being a source of all tension and needing to be destroyed) as the engine is essentially the society's throne that the different factions fight over. If you really don't think that Snowpiercer is science fiction, then don't call it science fiction. If you really don't give two fucks about the show or film, then why did you give enough of a fuck to watch the video? Something tells me you're like a lot of other people - you just like to complain.

[@thatww2nerd81]

Am I so lost

[@wardraven8755]

How many of you have seen the movie snowpiercer?

[@bukalex1]

1.9 tdi

[@Macialao]

To be honest I don't like this lore explanation. From scientific point of view, fusion reactor makes quite a lot of sense. The fuel for fusion being deuterium and tritium, isotopes of hydrogen. They do appear naturally in nature, but at very low quantity. And here is the scientific reasoning, the train has to run, as it consumes snow, performing electrolysis and in the ion state of electrolysis separating the isotopes via TOF (time of flight) mechanism, basically accelerating the ions in the homogeneous electric field. Heavier elements will accelerate slower due to Newton 1 law of motion. Thus we obtain pure Deuterium and Tritium, which can be used in fusion reactor. Assuming there is a storage on board, snow also provides cooling for the reactor, once fusion is started you cannot switch it off. If it dies, you need tremendous amount of energy to kick it off again. That said, the engine will struggle with overheating if the train stops (you cannot switch the reactor off!), or it will stop itself if the reactants are used and die out. So running a train at minimal speed will provide both reactants for fusion and cooling agent. One mishap might be, that in this scenario it might have been wiser to make a boat, with almost unlimited access to cooling and water. One would have to consider energy needed to move a train and a boat (friction loses). Also, snowfall results from water in the atmosphere, where solar radiation can turn regular hydrogen into heavier isotopes. That might explain why is it beneficial to use snow as a source of hydrogen isotopes, rather than ocean water (higher content of isotopes). This also assumes, that the atmosphere is not dead on such cold planet, and sun is still providing enough heat for convection i.e. winds which will shift snow onto the tracks again. What do you guys think?

[@HallimarRathlornStudios]

I mean, that's the biggest issue - this is a science fantasy show where the power source does not behave like a real power source but people remain *insistent* that science is the answer. Like, if fusion was the power source, why would the train be nearing a meltdown in season three when no power is being used and they could simply slow down the reaction speed or stop pumping fuel in? Of course, it's true that you can't shut the reactor down without needing a lot of energy to start it up again, but you could still slow the process down and/increase the frequency of the electrical grid. In addition, another problem is that a fusion reactor would not have issues with propelling the train at high speed like it does in the first season. During the end of the first season, it is clearly stated that if they drain the batteries, the engine dies immediately, which is not a characteristic of any sort of nuclear reactor, which always is able to power itself without batteries so long as fuel is still being pumped in. And on a final note, we can also see in most scenes in the show that snow on the tracks is rarely an issue - there is no major impact from wind and there is rarely a time when the train has to plow through snow. With the atmosphere being a uniform -119 C by the start of the show, the existence of wind would be minimal.

[@Kafj302]

I am like number 988

[@michaelhband]

👍👍👍❤❤❤🚂🚂🚂

[@biska131]

That part with turbine had inspired me to make one. It works, well kinda. I can power up a bulb, as fow now not more. So it can be done.

[@clevelandexplorer2221]

I love this! I'm a proper nerd to Sci fi physics theory. I understand and appreciate why the initial disclosure but I could philosophise the definition of perpetual motion is like a persons beauty or unicorn: beauty in the eyes of the beholder could mean liking a loud person where others wouldn't, because both charisma would compliment one another; a unicorn doesn't exist because we don't believe in them. So we behave the opposite to a ned flinders because the real world doesn't work with nice people so why should an individual strive to improve-yet the very notion makes a catch 22. As is, the notion of a perpetual engine shouldn't be defined by powering itself 100% but powered self sustainably. In this instance, a train may be powered theoretically a set distance innumerable with such an engine, but will eventually run out. But if the vessel has means to further supply itself with energy, it is debateably perpetual :) this could be by means of solar, wind power which could possibly use the same resistance or less to the wind-never stopping, as one or the other would be interchangeable. The theoretic train is totally plausible, though of course friction gets in the way. Another example of debatable perpetual motion could be the track transmitting power too, supplied by ground source? This, for perspective and intensive reasons, would be as opposed to a herculese circumnavigating the globe constantly with air tankers-thats external, reliance. Curious :o

[@williamparsons9738]

WTF????

[@terracub]

You're scaring me because the way you're talking makes it sound like you think this stuff is real. Just in case anybody out there is watching this there is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine and physics does not allow for one

[@joryharris8002]

I don't give a fuck about the train. Tell me how the track works.