Search a number
-
+
631662531949 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin10010011000100100000…
…01010101010101101101
32020101102122111022221201
421030102001111111231
540322121102010244
61202103132125501
763431120634541
oct11142201252555
92211378438851
10631662531949
11223983039479
12a2506606891
13477475b0907
142280341da21
151166e8e8ad4
hex931205556d

631662531949 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 631662531950. Its totient is φ = 631662531948.

The previous prime is 631662531937. The next prime is 631662532079. The reversal of 631662531949 is 949135266136.

It is a weak prime.

It can be written as a sum of positive squares in only one way, i.e., 631417765924 + 244766025 = 794618^2 + 15645^2 .

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 631662531949 - 229 = 631125661037 is a prime.

It is a self number, because there is not a number n which added to its sum of digits gives 631662531949.

It is a congruent number.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (631662501949) 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, 315831265974 + 315831265975.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (315831265975).

Almost surely, 2631662531949 is an apocalyptic number.

It is an amenable number.

631662531949 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

631662531949 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

631662531949 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its digits is 6298560, while the sum is 55.

It can be divided in two parts, 631662 and 531949, that added together give a palindrome (1163611).

The spelling of 631662531949 in words is "six hundred thirty-one billion, six hundred sixty-two million, five hundred thirty-one thousand, nine hundred forty-nine".