Search a number
-
+
163220506044481 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin100101000111001010111100…
…010010000110100001000001
3210101220201122200222222222101
4211013022330102012201001
5132343201044021410411
61335050244302310401
746244202204036244
oct4507127422064101
9711821580888871
10163220506044481
114800947856a956
1216381289288401
13700c82100b512
142c43cb3ad525b
1513d0b174158c1
hex9472bc486841

163220506044481 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 163220506044482. Its totient is φ = 163220506044480.

The previous prime is 163220506044467. The next prime is 163220506044523. The reversal of 163220506044481 is 184440605022361.

It is a weak prime.

It can be written as a sum of positive squares in only one way, i.e., 106299894113856 + 56920611930625 = 10310184^2 + 7544575^2 .

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 163220506044481 - 231 = 163218358560833 is a prime.

It is a super-2 number, since 2×1632205060444812 (a number of 29 digits) contains 22 as substring.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (163220506044461) by changing a digit.

It is a pernicious number, because its binary representation contains a prime number (19) of ones.

It is a polite number, since it can be written as a sum of consecutive naturals, namely, 81610253022240 + 81610253022241.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (81610253022241).

Almost surely, 2163220506044481 is an apocalyptic number.

It is an amenable number.

163220506044481 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

163220506044481 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

163220506044481 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its (nonzero) digits is 1105920, while the sum is 46.

The spelling of 163220506044481 in words is "one hundred sixty-three trillion, two hundred twenty billion, five hundred six million, forty-four thousand, four hundred eighty-one".