Don't think that's necessarily true.
Do you have a proof that some galaxies do not in fact, contain neutron stars, thus supporting your claim?
Usually, when a galaxy is destroyed, the implications is that it is entirely destroyed (and in cases they actually show said explosion, we see nothing left afterwards), rather than "oh it got destroyed but maybe a star remained despite the space being empty and there's no implication something survived". Assuming that stars survived this when we got no proof for them still existing doesn't seem right to me.
Which can been destroyed from a omnidirectional blast that encompass a entire galaxy. Not half, but the entire distance.
That's kinda devils proof.
Debateable. Depends on whether you consider 3 not gravitationally bound neutron stars to still be a galaxy.
Neutron stars emit basically no visible light, so if a galaxy is destroyed and nothing visible is left that doesn't mean the neutron stars were destroyed.
The implications of universe destruction are usually much different.
what if a character has statements that he can reduce "all things in the galaxy to nothingness" then can neutron star be usable for calc'ing for that character?
Again, I don’t see the point. You got the necessary energy to overcome the GBE of a neutron star at that point which is 4B also I don’t think we ever attempt to do subatomic destruction.
Even if the neutron star is not exactly at the edge, destroying it from its distance from the center will still exceed the level required for 3-C
Black holes don’t have a GBE that can be measured, Throwing Energy into a black hole only makes it bigger
that is true but the galaxy has a measurable estimated GBE
Galaxies don’t really have one and The main problem with that is the only thing keeping galaxies together is dark matter (they would fly apart if it was not keeping them together), which also likely isn’t even usable for this.
That can't be destroyed by conventional energy at all, so no. That would always remain after regular destruction.
Means we additionally need to assume neutron star placement, though.
If they do it via inverse square law, maybe.
Thank you for your answers
I do remember some more research papers, but we need more new updated information too to ensure it is fine to use I think. After all, research isn’t just done in one day too especially with new info
i'll look mor einto that but the links also have GBE of galaxy clusters
I was asked by a friend to ask "Why is the baseline for galaxy level Not blowing up everything in the galaxy.
