David: The Answer is 28

---

If you're not a Lost fanatic, the contents of this post will be extremely boring (unless you're in to number sequences).

You've been warned.

During some off time at work today I became determined to find some sort of sequence or pattern in the damned "Lost numbers", those being 4 8 15 16 23 42.

While there isn't a method for determining the next number in the sequence, each number in the current sequence has a unique relationship to the previous numbers. Just to be clear, this is true for any number sequence.

Here is how I see them as being derived:
The first is the base.
The second number is twice the first.
The third is twice the second minus 1.
The fourth is twice the second.
The fifth is the sum of the second and third.
The sixth is the sum of the first, third, and fifth.

Using the above rules, the following sequences come from bases 1 - 6:
1 2 3 4 5 9 - 24
2 4 7 8 11 20 - 52
3 6 11 12 17 31 - 80
4 8 15 16 23 42 - 108
5 10 19 20 29 53 - 136
6 12 23 24 35 64 -164

The difference between every total derived from this sequence ends up being 28. Though, it should be noted that all sequences derived in this fashion will end up with a common difference in sums.

For instance:

1 9 36 84 100 - 230
2 18 72 168 200 - 460
3 27 108 252 300 - 690
4 36 144 336 400 - 920

Where the initial sequence was just a random set of numbers I wrote down.

Also notice the pattern that forms in each column.

As far as I can tell, all this means nothing. The only questions this raises for me are, "Is 28 relevant?" and "Why "9" and not "6" in the base 1 sequence?"

Demannu - (<--- Eats Worms)

---

David - ()

---

Your account has been disabled.