Search a number
-
+
3333222002441 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin110000100000010011100…
…000110110111100001001
3102210122121222020220000002
4300200103200312330021
5414102414313034231
611031132215252345
7462550230354422
oct60402340667411
912718558226002
103333222002441
11107567aa18141
1245a00137a0b5
131b24243c7106
14b7486358649
155ba888240cb
hex30813836f09

3333222002441 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 3333222002442. Its totient is φ = 3333222002440.

The previous prime is 3333222002437. The next prime is 3333222002479. The reversal of 3333222002441 is 1442002223333.

It is a weak prime.

It can be written as a sum of positive squares in only one way, i.e., 2914326979600 + 418895022841 = 1707140^2 + 647221^2 .

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 3333222002441 - 22 = 3333222002437 is a prime.

It is a super-2 number, since 2×33332220024412 (a number of 26 digits) contains 22 as substring.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (3333222092441) 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, 1666611001220 + 1666611001221.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (1666611001221).

Almost surely, 23333222002441 is an apocalyptic number.

It is an amenable number.

3333222002441 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

3333222002441 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

3333222002441 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its (nonzero) digits is 20736, while the sum is 29.

Adding to 3333222002441 its reverse (1442002223333), we get a palindrome (4775224225774).

The spelling of 3333222002441 in words is "three trillion, three hundred thirty-three billion, two hundred twenty-two million, two thousand, four hundred forty-one".