Search a number
-
+
2313023269 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin1000100111011101…
…1110111100100101
312222012100202102111
42021313132330211
514214113221034
61021304041021
7111214242034
oct21167367445
95865322374
102313023269
11a87706687
12546763171
132ab284b2b
1417d29c71b
15d80e5364
hex89ddef25

2313023269 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 2313023270. Its totient is φ = 2313023268.

The previous prime is 2313023263. The next prime is 2313023309. The reversal of 2313023269 is 9623203132.

It is a weak prime.

It can be written as a sum of positive squares in only one way, i.e., 1368260100 + 944763169 = 36990^2 + 30737^2 .

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 2313023269 - 23 = 2313023261 is a prime.

It is a super-2 number, since 2×23130232692 = 10700153285870892722, which contains 22 as substring.

It is a self number, because there is not a number n which added to its sum of digits gives 2313023269.

It is a congruent number.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (2313023261) 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, 1156511634 + 1156511635.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (1156511635).

Almost surely, 22313023269 is an apocalyptic number.

It is an amenable number.

2313023269 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

2313023269 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

2313023269 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its (nonzero) digits is 11664, while the sum is 31.

The square root of 2313023269 is about 48093.9005384259. The cubic root of 2313023269 is about 1322.4928536890.

The spelling of 2313023269 in words is "two billion, three hundred thirteen million, twenty-three thousand, two hundred sixty-nine".