Search a number
-
+
200121211022021 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin101101100000001001011001…
…101100011110101011000101
3222020120101211021112221222022
4231200021121230132223011
5202212241220010201041
61545342225402212525
760103165111102412
oct5540113154365305
9866511737487868
10200121211022021
1158845a24522213
121a5409b87b4145
138788470329513
14375bcbdb29109
15182092a50b24b
hexb60259b1eac5

200121211022021 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 200121211022022. Its totient is φ = 200121211022020.

The previous prime is 200121211021987. The next prime is 200121211022099. The reversal of 200121211022021 is 120220112121002.

It is a weak prime.

It can be written as a sum of positive squares in only one way, i.e., 199277548564900 + 843662457121 = 14116570^2 + 918511^2 .

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 200121211022021 - 230 = 200120137280197 is a prime.

It is a congruent number.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (200121211042021) 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, 100060605511010 + 100060605511011.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (100060605511011).

Almost surely, 2200121211022021 is an apocalyptic number.

It is an amenable number.

200121211022021 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

200121211022021 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

200121211022021 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its (nonzero) digits is 64, while the sum is 17.

Adding to 200121211022021 its reverse (120220112121002), we get a palindrome (320341323143023).

The spelling of 200121211022021 in words is "two hundred trillion, one hundred twenty-one billion, two hundred eleven million, twenty-two thousand, twenty-one".