Search a number
-
+
101010100100989 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin10110111101111000111111…
…001000101001111101111101
3111020122110201112212020122011
4112331320333020221331331
5101214422141111212424
6554455222133251221
730163511305265662
oct2675707710517575
9436573645766564
10101010100100989
112a2041631a7472
12b3b4526193b11
134449299a796b1
141ad2cb47d7a69
15ba2787ab8694
hex5bde3f229f7d

101010100100989 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 101010100100990. Its totient is φ = 101010100100988.

The previous prime is 101010100100971. The next prime is 101010100101011. The reversal of 101010100100989 is 989001001010101.

It is a weak prime.

It can be written as a sum of positive squares in only one way, i.e., 92121699980025 + 8888400120964 = 9598005^2 + 2981342^2 .

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 101010100100989 - 235 = 100975740362621 is a prime.

It is a self number, because there is not a number n which added to its sum of digits gives 101010100100989.

It is a congruent number.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (101010100100909) by changing a digit.

It is a pernicious number, because its binary representation contains a prime number (31) of ones.

It is a polite number, since it can be written as a sum of consecutive naturals, namely, 50505050050494 + 50505050050495.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (50505050050495).

Almost surely, 2101010100100989 is an apocalyptic number.

It is an amenable number.

101010100100989 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

101010100100989 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

101010100100989 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its (nonzero) digits is 648, while the sum is 31.

The spelling of 101010100100989 in words is "one hundred one trillion, ten billion, one hundred million, one hundred thousand, nine hundred eighty-nine".