649090867 - A game
I’ve discovered a number, 649090867, that has significance within Game Maker. I call it NakedPaulToast’s Number. The object is to guess the significant property. A Google search won’t reveal the answer, I’m fairly confident the property, while known to exist, the number until now has been unknown.
I’ll reveal a new clue, everyday, until the property I’m looking for, is revealed.
So, what is the significant property, regarding 649090867?
June 13th, 2008 at 11:06 am
Intentional comment left, just so people are more likely to click the topic. Easier for me to tell how much interest there is.
June 13th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Does it have something to do with random seeding?
Yes, I did search Google, but since every result had to do with Delphi, I figured I’d take a stab at it.
June 13th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Well, it’s definitely a prime number. It fits into 32 bits (30, actually: 00100110 10110000 01010111 00110011; 0×26B05733). It has no significance as an ASCII string. It’s not expressible as the sum of two cubes.
I don’t have Game Maker here at work, so I can’t go beyond mathematical curiosities.
June 13th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
I see…. Or not…. What do you mean by it “has a significance” can you show us some of your code? I had this as my code in an object’s create event:
{
score+=649090867
}
and noticed nothing strange, it displayed the score as 649090867. Nothing. Unless you are talking about a certain function in GM that I don’t know yet, I see no significance in the number 649090867. Nothing strange.
Bugaham Games
June 13th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
A little research leads me to the conclusion that 649090867 is involved in the random seed generation process. How, exactly, I don’t know. I defer to the interpretation of more experienced members on this one.
A quick Google lead me to this: http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/pas-rand.htm , then I Ctrl-F-ed the number and was sent down to the sections on “Determining the Constants”. I’ll quote it here:
[-----------]
The value of c can be found by setting Randseed:=0 then calling Random and reading RandSeed; the value of a is then obvious from the next RandSeed. The value of b can be found by looping through the full range and considering the value previous to Randseed=0.
The part of the BP7 RandSeed sequence around 0 is :-
-19094774, 649090867, 0, 1, 134775814, -596792289.
Using the forward sequence 0, 1, 134775814, c = 1 and then a = 134775813.
Using the reverse sequence 1, 0, 649090867, c = 1 and then b = -649090867.
So actually b is either -649090867 or +3645876429 (which are equal, mod 232) in Borland Pascal 7 and Delphi 3; those satisfy (a * b) mod M = 1.
[-----------]
Combined with this page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~itsme/projects/sources/other/zippw.c , and more specifically this text (I put a “_” in place of each indent):
[-----------]
Procedure CycleRandseed(cycles:Integer);
//For cycles > 0, mimics cycles calls to the TP random number generator.
//For cycles 0 then
__For i := 1 to cycles do
___system.randseed := system.randseed*134775813 + 1
_else
__For i := -1 downto cycles do
___ system.randseed := (system.randseed-1)*(-649090867);
[-----------]
This set of code actually seems pretty universal. I found at least 5 other pages that used almost exactly the same code. coincidence? I think not.
From these two pages, I’m going to hazard a guess that 649090867 is the modifier in GM’s PRNG that determines the seed for the next random(x) function call.
I don’t have enough time at the moment to look into it any more or do any specific testing in GM. Maybe later.
———–
And even more interestingly, I ran across this page: http://www.facebook.com/people/Nicolas_Gonzalez/649090867 (*cough* search fail *cough*)
June 13th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
So much for an exhaustive search.
June 13th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
Also, setting it as a seed to GM’s RNG causes the next random call to be exactly 0. Enough to prove to those pesky unbelievers that ceil(random(x)) is bad.
June 13th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
“Also, setting it as a seed to GM’s RNG causes the next random call to be exactly 0. Enough to prove to those pesky unbelievers that ceil(random(x)) is bad.”
Is that it? If it is, yay, because I had thought of that a while ago, but hadn’t had a chance to test it.
And if that’s not it, as Yourself said, this will prove the “unbelievers” wrong. Finally.
June 13th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
I reckon its either the number of lines of code used to make Game Maker or Mark Overmars Mobile Number…
Seriously, I haven’t got a clue.
June 13th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
Yourself, is exactly right.
Seeding the random number generator with 649090867, will cause the next call to random() to return exactly 0.000000000000000…….
He is also correct, regarding it being enough to prove to the “pesky unbelievers” that ceil (random(x)) is bad. That was also partially my motivation, when I sought out to find the number last night.
The smart money was on Yourself to solve, but I honestly didn’t think he would come up with it, solely given the number. Congrats to Yourself.
Congrats also to Mnementh, Soleil and B&B Gaming for being on target with their hypothesis.
Honourable mentions to hardcoregamer and erthgy, for not making any asinine outlandish comments.
June 13th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
[...] Naked Paul Toast’s Insights Naked and out there « 649090867 - A game [...]
June 15th, 2008 at 2:23 am
I always enjoy your sense of humor NPT.
What I don’t understand is WHY that number is important? Google reveals alot of high level mathematics in which my tired brain is not ready for at the moment. What is the significance of the number? (I understand what it does, thanks to that detailed description)
June 15th, 2008 at 11:46 am
So what part of all the previous replies didn’t you understand?
June 16th, 2008 at 2:18 am
“Also, setting it as a seed to GM’s RNG causes the next random call to be exactly 0. Enough to prove to those pesky unbelievers that ceil(random(x)) is bad.”
Yes, but why? I know it might be like asking why 1+1=2, if so then just saying “it just is”. But why does the number 649090867 have any reason for the above to be caused? Why not 25656? 3567356738? Why is it special?
June 16th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Because there has to be some seed that does it. The constants in the LCRNG are just so that it comes out that way. It’s not like it’s written in the Bible.
July 16th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
thats funny, random seed was the very first thing I thought of, and I read the question under 2 minutes ago. There is really nothing else in GM that this number could be of significance too. pitty I came WAAY to late…