Search a number
-
+
1065566639 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin111111100000110…
…100000110101111
32202021001101122002
4333200310012233
54140241113024
6253422442515
735256111164
oct7740640657
92667041562
101065566639
114a7536a95
12258a3343b
1313c9b5b07
14a173806b
15638336ae
hex3f8341af

1065566639 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 1065566640. Its totient is φ = 1065566638.

The previous prime is 1065566611. The next prime is 1065566641. The reversal of 1065566639 is 9366655601.

It is a strong prime.

It is an emirp because it is prime and its reverse (9366655601) is a distict prime.

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 1065566639 - 216 = 1065501103 is a prime.

It is a super-2 number, since 2×10655666392 = 2270864524299512642, which contains 22 as substring.

Together with 1065566641, it forms a pair of twin primes.

It is a Chen prime.

It is a junction number, because it is equal to n+sod(n) for n = 1065566593 and 1065566602.

It is a congruent number.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (1065566039) by changing a digit.

It is a pernicious number, because its binary representation contains a prime number (17) of ones.

It is a polite number, since it can be written as a sum of consecutive naturals, namely, 532783319 + 532783320.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (532783320).

Almost surely, 21065566639 is an apocalyptic number.

1065566639 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

1065566639 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

1065566639 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its (nonzero) digits is 874800, while the sum is 47.

The square root of 1065566639 is about 32643.0182274863. The cubic root of 1065566639 is about 1021.3945550588.

The spelling of 1065566639 in words is "one billion, sixty-five million, five hundred sixty-six thousand, six hundred thirty-nine".