[go: up one dir, main page]

Search a number
-
+
100061669 is a prime number
BaseRepresentation
bin1011111011011…
…01000111100101
320222021122210202
411331231013211
5201103433134
613532400245
72323336661
oct575550745
9228248722
10100061669
11515338a4
1229616085
13179658b6
14d4098a1
158bb7d7e
hex5f6d1e5

100061669 has 2 divisors, whose sum is σ = 100061670. Its totient is φ = 100061668.

The previous prime is 100061659. The next prime is 100061671. The reversal of 100061669 is 966160001.

It is a strong prime.

It can be written as a sum of positive squares in only one way, i.e., 84364225 + 15697444 = 9185^2 + 3962^2 .

It is an emirp because it is prime and its reverse (966160001) is a distict prime.

It is a cyclic number.

It is not a de Polignac number, because 100061669 - 216 = 99996133 is a prime.

It is a super-2 number, since 2×1000616692 = 20024675206131122, which contains 22 as substring.

Together with 100061671, it forms a pair of twin primes.

It is a Chen prime.

It is a congruent number.

It is not a weakly prime, because it can be changed into another prime (100061659) 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, 50030834 + 50030835.

It is an arithmetic number, because the mean of its divisors is an integer number (50030835).

Almost surely, 2100061669 is an apocalyptic number.

It is an amenable number.

100061669 is a deficient number, since it is larger than the sum of its proper divisors (1).

100061669 is an equidigital number, since it uses as much as digits as its factorization.

100061669 is an odious number, because the sum of its binary digits is odd.

The product of its (nonzero) digits is 1944, while the sum is 29.

The square root of 100061669 is about 10003.0829747633. The cubic root of 100061669 is about 464.2542778016.

The spelling of 100061669 in words is "one hundred million, sixty-one thousand, six hundred sixty-nine".