Search a number
-
+
51292469 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin1100001110101…
…0100100110101
310120111221001002
43003222210311
5101112324334
65031213045
71161656504
oct303524465
9116457032
1051292469
1126a53878
1215217185
13a81b797
146b5283b
154782b7e
hex30ea935

51292469 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 51292470. Its totient is φ = 51292468.

The previous prime is 51292447. The next prime is 51292481. The reversal of 51292469 is 96429215.

51292469 is digitally balanced in base 2, because in such base it contains all the possibile digits an equal number of times.

It is a strong prime.

It can be written as a sum of positive squares in only one way, i.e., 40170244 + 11122225 = 6338^2 + 3335^2 .

It is a cyclic number.

It is a de Polignac number, because none of the positive numbers 2k-51292469 is a prime.

It is a super-2 number, since 2×512924692 = 5261834752231922, which contains 22 as substring.

It is a Sophie Germain prime.

It is a Chen prime.

It is a Curzon number.

It is a congruent number.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (51292489) by changing a digit.

It is a pernicious number, because its binary representation contains a prime number (13) of ones.

It is a polite number, since it can be written as a sum of consecutive naturals, namely, 25646234 + 25646235.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (25646235).

Almost surely, 251292469 is an apocalyptic number.

It is an amenable number.

51292469 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

51292469 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

51292469 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its digits is 38880, while the sum is 38.

The square root of 51292469 is about 7161.8760810279. The cubic root of 51292469 is about 371.5505155179.

The spelling of 51292469 in words is "fifty-one million, two hundred ninety-two thousand, four hundred sixty-nine".