Search a number
-
+
318182861989 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin1001010000101010010…
…11010010110010100101
31010102021201012010021001
410220111023102302211
520203114303040424
6402100550553301
731662603462646
oct4502513226245
91112251163231
10318182861989
11112a38a26673
12517ba968831
1324009bc5945
1411585d6d6cd
158423b38844
hex4a152d2ca5

318182861989 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 318182861990. Its totient is φ = 318182861988.

The previous prime is 318182861911. The next prime is 318182862001. The reversal of 318182861989 is 989168281813.

It is a strong prime.

It can be written as a sum of positive squares in only one way, i.e., 289937017764 + 28245844225 = 538458^2 + 168065^2 .

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 318182861989 - 211 = 318182859941 is a prime.

It is a super-2 number, since 2×3181828619892 (a number of 24 digits) contains 22 as substring.

It is a self number, because there is not a number n which added to its sum of digits gives 318182861989.

It is a congruent number.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (318122861989) by changing a digit.

It is a pernicious number, because its binary representation contains a prime number (17) of ones.

It is a polite number, since it can be written as a sum of consecutive naturals, namely, 159091430994 + 159091430995.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (159091430995).

Almost surely, 2318182861989 is an apocalyptic number.

It is an amenable number.

318182861989 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

318182861989 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

318182861989 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its digits is 11943936, while the sum is 64.

The spelling of 318182861989 in words is "three hundred eighteen billion, one hundred eighty-two million, eight hundred sixty-one thousand, nine hundred eighty-nine".