Search a number
-
+
10323332232131 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin1001011000111001011010…
…0011001111001111000011
31100112220022202212110222002
42112032112203033033003
52323114141022412011
633542250124534215
72113556540102222
oct226162643171703
940486282773862
1010323332232131
113320111a09696
1211a88930b136b
1359b641b1b039
1427991ad22cb9
1512d800b8ac3b
hex963968cf3c3

10323332232131 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 10323332232132. Its totient is φ = 10323332232130.

The previous prime is 10323332232121. The next prime is 10323332232151. The reversal of 10323332232131 is 13123223332301.

It is a weak prime.

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 10323332232131 - 230 = 10322258490307 is a prime.

It is a super-2 number, since 2×103233322321312 (a number of 27 digits) contains 22 as substring.

It is a junction number, because it is equal to n+sod(n) for n = 10323332232094 and 10323332232103.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (10323332232121) by changing a digit.

It is a pernicious number, because its binary representation contains a prime number (23) of ones.

It is a polite number, since it can be written as a sum of consecutive naturals, namely, 5161666116065 + 5161666116066.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (5161666116066).

Almost surely, 210323332232131 is an apocalyptic number.

10323332232131 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

10323332232131 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

10323332232131 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its (nonzero) digits is 11664, while the sum is 29.

Adding to 10323332232131 its reverse (13123223332301), we get a palindrome (23446555564432).

The spelling of 10323332232131 in words is "ten trillion, three hundred twenty-three billion, three hundred thirty-two million, two hundred thirty-two thousand, one hundred thirty-one".