- 6,590
- 1,700
I read somewhere that it was 7 kilofoe. But when I used the gbe formula I wound up with 4.6e54 joules, which is around 46 billion foe? Assuming I did the math right.
-
This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.
For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here. -
We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.
Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.
Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page. -
Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
AP For Destroying a Neutron Star?
- Thread starter Lightbuster30
- Start date
-
- Tags
- attack potency
- 3,456
- 881
I'll redo the maths to confirm for you
G = 6.67408e-11
M = 2.78e30
r = 10,000
n = 0.5
Plugging those into a calulator tells me that a low-end for a small, light neutron star is 3.438664e+46 joules, or 343.9 Foe.
Don't know what you did, but I don't think you'll get anyone to sign off on Multi-Solar System star destruction
G = 6.67408e-11
M = 2.78e30
r = 10,000
n = 0.5
Plugging those into a calulator tells me that a low-end for a small, light neutron star is 3.438664e+46 joules, or 343.9 Foe.
Don't know what you did, but I don't think you'll get anyone to sign off on Multi-Solar System star destruction
- 6,590
- 1,700
- Thread starter
- #3
3 x 6.67408e-11 x 1.526e30^2 / 5 x 7500 = 6.9937965e+53 joules. Equation was based on https://www.fxsolver.com/browse/for...ng+Energy+-+spherical+mass+of+uniform+density this calculator. Other values taken from google search. Was I supposed to include the value n?Crimson Azoth said:
- 3,456
- 881
Oh, I see your mistake. You used the formula for planetary GBE.
The formula that you used was 3GM^2 / 5r.
The formula for stellar GBE is 3GM^2 / r (5 - n). You've got to use the formula for stellar GBE for obvious reasons, as a neutron star is a star. The Gravitational Binding Energy page has some more information on the subject
The formula that you used was 3GM^2 / 5r.
The formula for stellar GBE is 3GM^2 / r (5 - n). You've got to use the formula for stellar GBE for obvious reasons, as a neutron star is a star. The Gravitational Binding Energy page has some more information on the subject
- 6,590
- 1,700
- Thread starter
- #5
Ah, well I still had kilofoe levels with both of our values. Did you do anything different?
- 10,748
- 6,476
Wait...so if someone makes a star sized planet (just roll with it) could it reach 4-B/4-A?
- 3,456
- 881
@Light The only difference between the values that we used, aside from the obvious, that you used a different formula, was the radius value. Neutron stars tend to have a radius of between 10 and 20 kilometers, of which I used the low end of 10km for my radius, so I do not know where you got the 7.5 km value.
@Andy Some quick napkin maths tells me that (assuming the planet is of a similar size to our Sun, and has the same density as good old mother Earth), that the answer is no. I ended up with 3.4310743e+42 joules, which is high-end 4-C. You'd need one honking big planet to reach 4-A by making one
@Andy Some quick napkin maths tells me that (assuming the planet is of a similar size to our Sun, and has the same density as good old mother Earth), that the answer is no. I ended up with 3.4310743e+42 joules, which is high-end 4-C. You'd need one honking big planet to reach 4-A by making one
- 6,590
- 1,700
- Thread starter
- #8
G9t it via Google search. Said they were 15 km wide and 1.4 solar masses.
- 8,438
- 3,292
A neutron star is actually used for the bound of 3-A since it is the most conventionally durable cluster of matter in the universe.
- 3,456
- 881
I will be perfectly honest, that makes not a lick of damn sense. Destroying a single superdense ball of matter than is a few km wide = having the power to destroy the universe?
Wut?
Wut?
- 6,590
- 1,700
- Thread starter
- #11
No destroying it while it is at the edge of the universe via explosion.
- 6,590
- 1,700
- Thread starter
- #12
Inverse square law.
- 8,438
- 3,292
Oh no, you misunderstand me.
Inverse square law with the radius of the observable universe and the GBE of the strongest neutron star is used.
That way you need to be able to destroy the most durable cluster of matter in the universe at the range of the radius of the observable universe. If you can do that, you can destroy all matter in the universe.
Inverse square law with the radius of the observable universe and the GBE of the strongest neutron star is used.
That way you need to be able to destroy the most durable cluster of matter in the universe at the range of the radius of the observable universe. If you can do that, you can destroy all matter in the universe.
- 30,046
- 31,266
A Neutron Star's durability was calc'd at 4-B iirc. It was in either Kepekley or Assalt's blog and it was a couple hundred foe I think.
- 3,456
- 881
@Assalt Ah, that makes sense. Sorry for misunderstanding @DDM My first comment on the thread is a calculation of a neutron star's GBE, which is 343.9 Foe. But I'm not entirely sure how right I was.
- 8,438
- 3,292
If you want a exact number you can rip the GBE formula out of the 3-A calculation to find the durability of the strongest neutron star. That said, it's in 4-B.
Bonus fun fact: The magnetic field of a Magnetar Neutron Star is so incredibly strong that it pulls on the electron cloud configuration of atoms. Because of this, covalent bonds, the bonds found in carbon, become impossible and therefore any lifeform would be atomically unmade and biological Life rendered fundamentally impossible.
Bonus fun fact: The magnetic field of a Magnetar Neutron Star is so incredibly strong that it pulls on the electron cloud configuration of atoms. Because of this, covalent bonds, the bonds found in carbon, become impossible and therefore any lifeform would be atomically unmade and biological Life rendered fundamentally impossible.
- 3,456
- 881
That's so freakin cool! {science fanboy awakened}
Similar threads
