Search a number
-
+
314242014431 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin1001001001010100100…
…10001001110011011111
31010001010001210022201002
410210222102021303133
520122031423430211
6400205532540515
731463132023322
oct4445222116337
91101101708632
10314242014431
111112a6474564
1250a9b02173b
132382c615497
14112d08167b9
158292b9a03b
hex492a489cdf

314242014431 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 314242014432. Its totient is φ = 314242014430.

The previous prime is 314242014421. The next prime is 314242014433. The reversal of 314242014431 is 134410242413.

It is a strong prime.

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 314242014431 - 214 = 314241998047 is a prime.

It is a super-2 number, since 2×3142420144312 (a number of 24 digits) contains 22 as substring.

Together with 314242014433, it forms a pair of twin primes.

It is a Chen prime.

It is a junction number, because it is equal to n+sod(n) for n = 314242014394 and 314242014403.

It is a congruent number.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (314242014433) 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, 157121007215 + 157121007216.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (157121007216).

Almost surely, 2314242014431 is an apocalyptic number.

314242014431 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

314242014431 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

314242014431 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its (nonzero) digits is 9216, while the sum is 29.

Adding to 314242014431 its reverse (134410242413), we get a palindrome (448652256844).

The spelling of 314242014431 in words is "three hundred fourteen billion, two hundred forty-two million, fourteen thousand, four hundred thirty-one".