Search a number
-
+
46676429 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin1011001000001…
…1100111001101
310020211102000122
42302003213031
543422121204
64344234325
71104512612
oct262034715
9106742018
1046676429
1124390768
121376b9a5
1398936b7
1462b0509
1541700be
hex2c839cd

46676429 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 46676430. Its totient is φ = 46676428.

The previous prime is 46676417. The next prime is 46676431. The reversal of 46676429 is 92467664.

46676429 is digitally balanced in base 2, because in such base it contains all the possibile digits an equal number of times.

It is a strong prime.

It can be written as a sum of positive squares in only one way, i.e., 39375625 + 7300804 = 6275^2 + 2702^2 .

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 46676429 - 212 = 46672333 is a prime.

Together with 46676431, it forms a pair of twin primes.

It is a Chen prime.

It is a self number, because there is not a number n which added to its sum of digits gives 46676429.

It is a congruent number.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (46676449) by changing a digit.

It is a pernicious number, because its binary representation contains a prime number (13) of ones.

It is a polite number, since it can be written as a sum of consecutive naturals, namely, 23338214 + 23338215.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (23338215).

Almost surely, 246676429 is an apocalyptic number.

It is an amenable number.

46676429 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

46676429 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

46676429 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its digits is 435456, while the sum is 44.

The square root of 46676429 is about 6832.0150029109. The cubic root of 46676429 is about 360.0525360571.

The spelling of 46676429 in words is "forty-six million, six hundred seventy-six thousand, four hundred twenty-nine".