It's most likely a random number as it is in UUID version 4 format. The version identified by the 4 and the b in the correct spots "6d4061b1b-a7ee-4a9e-b0ae-509617252b42" (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universally_Unique_Identifier#V...). Person who placed the geocache probably wanted a way to google anyone who found it.
UUID v4 seems kind of plausible, although it has no advantage at all over a random string if you just wanted to google. What is interesting is that caches on geocaching.com are identified by v4 UUIDs. But this one doesn't turn up anything. The person with the UUID idea has the number wrong, incidentally, it's
It could be a 'live' multicache, too. There are some pretty long ones (many km) and they usually only tell you the starting point, the other coordinates need to be deduced, which would explain why it's on no map.
I'd really like to see a Chi-square analysis on this by a smarter statistician than me. Power should be pretty low since you only have 16 bytes.
Alternatively, in a series of sixteen uniformly-distributed bytes, what's the probability that the birthday paradox doesn't occur? That is, the probability that no two bytes are identical?
I can say as someone who's played around with English-language markov chains for years that this definitely isn't displaying the characteristics of English text, even with transformations like rot13 or multiplication. So the next logical question is, "Is it uniform?"
How would you do a chi-square on this? Doesn't seem to me to be the right sort of test.
If you think its hex/ascii, you can try to do a hypothesis test on the max frequency of each digit/letter and see what happens there. But, for any test, you need an underlying model against which you test. What model are you thinking of?
If you aren't a troll, then why were you beneath a bridge, smartguy?