Search a number
-
+
824920849 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin110001001010110…
…100101100010001
32010111020022200001
4301022310230101
53142134431344
6213504530001
726304466024
oct6112645421
92114208601
10824920849
11393712275
121b0320901
13101b9a05c
147b7b51bb
154c64aed4
hex312b4b11

824920849 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 824920850. Its totient is φ = 824920848.

The previous prime is 824920847. The next prime is 824920871. The reversal of 824920849 is 948029428.

It is a weak prime.

It can be written as a sum of positive squares in only one way, i.e., 823403025 + 1517824 = 28695^2 + 1232^2 .

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 824920849 - 21 = 824920847 is a prime.

It is a super-2 number, since 2×8249208492 = 1360988814229761602, which contains 22 as substring.

Together with 824920847, 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 = 824920799 and 824920808.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (824920841) 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, 412460424 + 412460425.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (412460425).

Almost surely, 2824920849 is an apocalyptic number.

It is an amenable number.

824920849 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

824920849 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

824920849 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its (nonzero) digits is 331776, while the sum is 46.

The square root of 824920849 is about 28721.4353575862. The cubic root of 824920849 is about 937.8587328532.

The spelling of 824920849 in words is "eight hundred twenty-four million, nine hundred twenty thousand, eight hundred forty-nine".