Search a number
-
+
9943031641 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin10010100001010011…
…01001111101011001
3221122221120100020011
421100221221331121
5130330404003031
64322345401521
7501253242304
oct112051517531
927587510204
109943031641
114242644924
121b15a992a1
13c25c6239a
146a4773b3b
153d2da86b1
hex250a69f59

9943031641 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 9943031642. Its totient is φ = 9943031640.

The previous prime is 9943031633. The next prime is 9943031741. The reversal of 9943031641 is 1461303499.

9943031641 is digitally balanced in base 2, 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., 9769345600 + 173686041 = 98840^2 + 13179^2 .

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 9943031641 - 23 = 9943031633 is a prime.

It is a junction number, because it is equal to n+sod(n) for n = 9943031594 and 9943031603.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (9943031741) 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, 4971515820 + 4971515821.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (4971515821).

Almost surely, 29943031641 is an apocalyptic number.

It is an amenable number.

9943031641 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

9943031641 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

9943031641 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its (nonzero) digits is 69984, while the sum is 40.

The square root of 9943031641 is about 99714.7513710985. The cubic root of 9943031641 is about 2150.3357428446.

The spelling of 9943031641 in words is "nine billion, nine hundred forty-three million, thirty-one thousand, six hundred forty-one".