Search a number
-
+
10120320330031 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin1001001101000101001000…
…0110010010100100101111
31022211111022112011022112001
42103101102012102210233
52311302404001030111
633305113323153131
72063111654311432
oct223212206224457
938744275138461
1010120320330031
113252004a988aa
1211754769757a7
1358545a80b092
1426db7cc1b819
151283bd0c11c1
hex9345219292f

10120320330031 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 10120320330032. Its totient is φ = 10120320330030.

The previous prime is 10120320329971. The next prime is 10120320330059. The reversal of 10120320330031 is 13003302302101.

It is a strong prime.

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 10120320330031 - 239 = 9570564516143 is a prime.

It is a super-2 number, since 2×101203203300312 (a number of 27 digits) contains 22 as substring.

It is a junction number, because it is equal to n+sod(n) for n = 10120320329990 and 10120320330008.

It is a congruent number.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (10120320300031) by changing a digit.

It is a pernicious number, because its binary representation contains a prime number (19) of ones.

It is a polite number, since it can be written as a sum of consecutive naturals, namely, 5060160165015 + 5060160165016.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (5060160165016).

Almost surely, 210120320330031 is an apocalyptic number.

10120320330031 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

10120320330031 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

10120320330031 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its (nonzero) digits is 324, while the sum is 19.

Adding to 10120320330031 its reverse (13003302302101), we get a palindrome (23123622632132).

The spelling of 10120320330031 in words is "ten trillion, one hundred twenty billion, three hundred twenty million, three hundred thirty thousand, thirty-one".