I think a big missing factor is the field of endeavor, let's call it B for background, which is the amount of money/interest/activity floating around in the area you're doing things in. The more there is, the more likely you'll profit from doing even fairly random, even mediocre, things in the area. Plenty of people have gotten rich from mediocre-to-bad tech stuff (and plenty more earn an OK living doing an outright terrible job of coding); your chances of getting rich from not-great tech stuff are probably actually higher than your chances of getting rich from even really good music, say.

Or as they say in business school, picking your market is more important than what you do in the market. I don't particularly like that way of looking at it (I prefer people who picked an area because they're passionate about it, not because they saw the most money in it), but I think the 'B' factor can't really be overlooked; your odds are much better if the pie is big and money is falling from skies, than if you're fighting to get pieces of a small pie.

In fact, from a pure monetary-success angle, it may be better to pick a big-pie field that you're mediocre at, than a small-pie field where you'd be in the 90th percentile, depending on how much bigger the pie is. Do stuff in the vicinity of money, and you have a decent chance of some of it rubbing off on you...

L =0. when D =0 and even when T is Large.

L =0. when T =0 even when D is Large.

If you actually do work hard and create something of value, but don't do a very good job of telling the world about your passionate work, then you're going to be ignored and relegated to obscurity.

Except if you tell people you're going to do something you're less likely to do it since your brain can trick itself into feeling the same happy feelings it would feel if you actually did it... I'm not convinced the equation holds.

Reminds me of this visualization of a similar concept: http://joeyroth.com/poster/

I would only add that Luck Surface Area does not equate to Luck itself. You can buy half the tickets in the Lotto and still lose.

Take D as the karma factor. Isn't it the doing factor(D)? Doing is spreading goodness, getting more conscious and ultimately awakening. Simple - Karma is accumulated Points from your past births + Present life deeds also plays its part.

So D is the karma you've got inside from all your births(Birth1 + Birth2 + ... + Birth7).

Your formula sort of contradicts itself. When you talk about increasing the number of people who are aware of your passion, you are really talking about increasing your statistical probability that you will find someone that helps you. Therefore, what you are talking about is not luck at all but rather just math.

Luck would be something like Passion * number of times you spin in a circle before falling over dizzy.

Regardless, I like the premise of your article as I think you are right that good things do come to the passionate people that manage to get a lot of people on their side. That is sort of the Keith Ferrazzi mindset of how important relationships are to success.