Lostpedia has arranged an interview with TLE blogger Speaker for this Friday. Submit your questions here!
Do you have an idea for a new wiki? Please share it with us here

From Lostpedia

Correlation with the equation decompiled from Valenzetti site

I know a lot of physics and math guys post here, and I was wondering if any of you could help with this image decompiled from the background of one of the Lost Experience webmaze sites (www.valenzettiequation.com, supposedly in-game).

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f316/algovar/valeq.jpg

I was curious if T could stand for Tesla here as well. Is there other common notation here? I know g is ordinarily for gravitational pull, and m typically for mass (or would it be momentum?)

--PandoraX 15:46, 5 July 2006 (PDT)

In this case, T doesn't stand for Tesla because a Tesla is actually a unit of measurement. In physics, g stands for the acceleration of an object due to gravity, p stands for momentum, and m could stand for mass. However, if this has to do with the Valenzetti equations, they may have to due with some statistical calculation in which case m could be used to denote a moment, which could be used to see how a set of data is different from a standard distribution. The little sigma in this case could be a measurement of variance from some larger set of data and the beta could represent the probability of a false hypothesis (what the researchers are trying to test with their data). Also, I could be completely wrong as I haven't taken upper-level stat. This just doesn't look like a physics equation to me. Hopefully someone else knows the answer!

--Alphahelix 10:44, 21 September 2006 (PDT)

It's definitely Statisical, the N's and Σ's indicate a sum operation (like a for loop in computing). It's much more complex than anything I did at A-level though.Lordofthe9 02:28, 1 November 2006 (PST)

Forgot to add response from here, thanks for your help, guys. Of course, it could just end up being gibberish, because this is a transparent flash layer behind the main text which they wouldn't expect most people to read and analyze. --PandoraX 04:46, 1 November 2006 (PST)

trig equations

I just discovered an explanation for the trig equations on the blast door and added them to the commentary section of this article. My interpretation seems a bit confusing without a diagram so I drew up something quick in m.s. paint (I don't have anything better). It looks like crap so I didn't post it in the article but I'm posting it here in hopes that someone will be able to redo it prettier. Perhaps breaking it into a few less congested diagrams to show step would make it easier to understand.--Roccyraccoon 14:12, 2 June 2006 (PDT)

I'll do an SVG in Flash then. :-) Lordofthe9 02:29, 1 November 2006 (PST)

• Apparently Flash doesn't do SVG so I'll make a PNG and keep the FLA in case anyone can help me out. Lordofthe9 03:33, 1 November 2006 (PST)

math markup

Perhaps it's just that I'm viewing this with IE at work, but I'm seeing inline error messages concerning rendering of the Math equations on this page. "Failed to parse (Missing texvc executable; please see math/README to configure.)" --fatcatfan 08:17, 20 October 2006 (PDT)

I'm getting them too. I don't know how to fix it and am too lazy to figure out how; someone better do it.--NotARedHerring 10:57, 24 October 2006 (PDT)

I pointed it out to Admin a while ago, hopefully he's on it. -Chris^[dt7] 10:59, 24 October 2006 (PDT)

It's nothing to do with your browser; it's a Mediawiki configuration issue. I was confused for a while, though (I thought it was part of the equation!)Lordofthe9 02:23, 1 November 2006 (PST)

So does that mean there's something one of us can do to make it work again? I remember it used to work for me, and looked great. --PandoraX 04:47, 1 November 2006 (PST)

We need someone who knows how to write those mediawiki math equations, any suggestions? --Blueeagleislander 16:25, 8 November 2006 (PST)

Is there at least a template to advise unsuspecting users that there is something wrong with the page until it gets fixed?--EvilSmoke 18:09, 19 November 2006 (PST)

I added the closest thing that we have to that template, the Under Construction one. Talked to Jabber about this and he doesn't know, I'll leave a msg on Admin's page as well. --PandoraX 19:07, 19 November 2006 (PST)

Something is wrong with Latex/TeX on the server-side. I got it working on my dev wiki and I don't see any problems with the syntax on the old working revision. Admin will have to fix. --   Jabberwock    talk    contribs    email   - 11:13, 20 November 2006 (PST)

Awesome, Admin fixed this :) I'm removing the rewrite tag now, and reposting some stuff that got moved to theories but isn't that extrapolatory. When I have time later, I'm going to sort through more and take out the less speculative stuff and put it on the main page. --PandoraX 04:21, 21 November 2006 (PST)

E+M equations

I updated the descriptions of the B field equation, which I am very familiar with. It is used to calculate the field from a permanent magnet. By making the substitution of and using some vector calculus identities, one can derive the vector field equivalent of the formula (aka the Biot-savart law) to compute the induction field from an electric coil or solenoid. See the wikipedia reference for Biot-savart and scalar and vector magnetic fields or the hyper-physics website.

From the show we see the following:

A. The magnetic fields are apparently DC, mostly time invariant, consistent with a permanent magnet or a solenoid driven with direct current.

B. The huge DC magnetic fields (10,000 Tesla) in the formulas are consistent with the effects of the magnetic forces in the show (ie tossing about large ferromagnetic objects like toys). They are immense, and This type of fields has not been observed in nature nor created in a lab yet. In theory, they could be generated by:

• (1) a permanent magnet with a remnant induction 100's of times greater than that known, or
• (2) a solenoid with a highly permeable soft ferromagnetic core with immense saturation Magnetization, 100's of times larger than anything else known, or
• (3) an immense collection of magnetic monopoles. These have never been seen in nature.

C. If the magnetic fields are immense, then the energy requirements are astronomical, since the energy goes as the fields squared. The formula for the energy (watts) per cubic meter volume is:

• • W = B² / 2μ₀

With 10,000 tesla fields, this means the energy requirements are on the order of 10¹⁴ Watts. That is 100 trillion watts. How much energy is this? This is over 20 times the power generated by the Hoover dam.

I am not familiar with the H field equation. However, i agree with the comment that it appears like a description of the H field from a electromagnetic wave propagation from antenna theory. --Divbis0 13:54, 24 November 2006 (PST)