Search a number
-
+
223222102231 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin1100111111100100010…
…0101111100011010111
3210100011201202201001211
43033321010233203113
512124124324232411
6250314040202251
722061436363652
oct3177104574327
9710151681054
10223222102231
118673906a327
1237318769387
131808540387b
14ab382a6899
155c17007221
hex33f912f8d7

223222102231 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 223222102232. Its totient is φ = 223222102230.

The previous prime is 223222102219. The next prime is 223222102253. The reversal of 223222102231 is 132201222322.

It is an a-pointer prime, because the next prime (223222102253) can be obtained adding 223222102231 to its sum of digits (22).

It is a weak prime.

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 223222102231 - 211 = 223222100183 is a prime.

It is a super-3 number, since 3×2232221022313 (a number of 35 digits) contains 333 as substring. Note that it is a super-d number also for d = 2.

It is a congruent number.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (223222102031) by changing a digit.

It is a pernicious number, because its binary representation contains a prime number (23) of ones.

It is a polite number, since it can be written as a sum of consecutive naturals, namely, 111611051115 + 111611051116.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (111611051116).

Almost surely, 2223222102231 is an apocalyptic number.

223222102231 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

223222102231 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

223222102231 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its (nonzero) digits is 1152, while the sum is 22.

Adding to 223222102231 its reverse (132201222322), we get a palindrome (355423324553).

The spelling of 223222102231 in words is "two hundred twenty-three billion, two hundred twenty-two million, one hundred two thousand, two hundred thirty-one".