Search a number
-
+
49960081 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin1011111010010…
…1010010010001
310111000020100101
42332211102101
5100242210311
64542452401
71144440133
oct276452221
9114006311
1049960081
1126223826
1214894101
13a4731a2
1468c7053
1545bcec1
hex2fa5491

49960081 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 49960082. Its totient is φ = 49960080.

The previous prime is 49960051. The next prime is 49960103. The reversal of 49960081 is 18006994.

49960081 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., 49575681 + 384400 = 7041^2 + 620^2 .

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 49960081 - 25 = 49960049 is a prime.

It is a super-2 number, since 2×499600812 = 4992019387053122, which contains 22 as substring.

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 49960081.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (49960021) 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, 24980040 + 24980041.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (24980041).

Almost surely, 249960081 is an apocalyptic number.

It is an amenable number.

49960081 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

49960081 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

49960081 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its (nonzero) digits is 15552, while the sum is 37.

The square root of 49960081 is about 7068.2445486839. The cubic root of 49960081 is about 368.3050818586.

The spelling of 49960081 in words is "forty-nine million, nine hundred sixty thousand, eighty-one".