Search a number
-
+
6464581309 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin1100000010101000…
…11010111010111101
3121200112020202102101
412001110122322331
5101214413100214
62545250225101
7316125014554
oct60124327275
917615222371
106464581309
1128180a668a
121304b85191
137c03cc654
144547c4d9b
1527c806774
hex18151aebd

6464581309 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 6464581310. Its totient is φ = 6464581308.

The previous prime is 6464581307. The next prime is 6464581367. The reversal of 6464581309 is 9031854646.

6464581309 is digitally balanced in base 3, because in such base it contains all the possibile digits an equal number of times.

It is a weak prime.

It can be written as a sum of positive squares in only one way, i.e., 6274224100 + 190357209 = 79210^2 + 13797^2 .

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 6464581309 - 21 = 6464581307 is a prime.

Together with 6464581307, it forms a pair of twin primes.

It is a congruent number.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (6464581307) 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, 3232290654 + 3232290655.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (3232290655).

Almost surely, 26464581309 is an apocalyptic number.

It is an amenable number.

6464581309 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

6464581309 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

6464581309 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its (nonzero) digits is 622080, while the sum is 46.

The square root of 6464581309 is about 80402.6200381555. The cubic root of 6464581309 is about 1862.8596422385.

The spelling of 6464581309 in words is "six billion, four hundred sixty-four million, five hundred eighty-one thousand, three hundred nine".