Grocery stores work just like atoms, to within .001%

5.39106(32) × 10⁻⁴⁴ s  The time it takes light to travel one plank unit. How is it so accurate?  The inverse of that number is longest  complete sequence using the bitstream math. The inverse is the density of the vacuum.

The first thing to notice is the speed of light is defined. That is, current theory claims light is not subject to plank  but is a quality of the vacuum everywhere.  In our region that has basically been confirmed, light remains more constant than plank with a precision of, well, Plank. The correlation coefficient is .9, meaning that the speed of light about 9 times more accurate than Plank, that is constant.

But in this theory, the sample rate of the vacuum and the density of the vacuum have some settling time; the time to keep relative vacuum sizes constant. The sample rate is nearly constant because their is a minimum ratio between phase and Nulls that keeps the volumes and rates consistent everywhere we look, in our region.

Remember, the only real constants in this theory are the existence of three distinguishable vacuum units, and the necessity of balancing phase, which is equivalent to balancing volume.  So in our region we know the density of the vacuum, it is 1/(5.4e-44), measured at the sampling rate of light. That must be the order of a 2* Higgs wave? The sampling rate that counts 1/(5.4e-44) to the nearest integer is the sampling rate of light.  Well, unless there is a bigger Higgs, but I doubt it. And that is the biggest quant that the vacuum can make. There are two numbers, the rate and the exponent.  rate**N is known, the r and the N separately are not, unless you believe some conjecture about rate and optimum packing. But since light is less than ten percent, we can factor that out and get a much smaller number, or 1.1902e17, when inverted. So the N and r we look for have the form: N = logr(1.1902) + 17* logr(10). Find the r, using very accurate logarithms, which makes N an integer. And the closest reasonable number I get is 3/2, whaddya know. N = 96.97. It is within .001%. Not a complete search, but I suspect it to be the answer.  It is not the light rate, mainly because we are really measuring a mass of Null.  But, I think we might have cracked this case, let's give it some thought.

I never believed it would be this close. I started a two months ago with the idea that physics works just like grocery stores, only one or two in the queue.  Now here I am with the same result for physics, to within .001% of what Plank says. I think this proves my case, its all about counting, everything.  Group theorists, the world is yours. 

Look over my numbers, please find my error:

rate	logr	Logr(10)	Times 17	N
1.1	1.8268915302	24.1588579281	410.7005847776	412.5274763079
1.2	0.9550234393	12.6292531365	214.6973033207	215.65232676
1.3	0.6636626394	8.7762908476	149.1969444099	149.8606070492
1.499	0.4301435925	5.6882293059	96.699898201	97.1300417936
1.5	0.4294361136	5.6788735873	96.5408509835	96.9702870972
1.5001	0.4293655196	5.6779400502	96.5249808529	96.9543463725
1.618	0.3618551175	4.7851808551	81.3480745369	81.7099296544

 
The other thing. When I started grabbing scale numbers and putting the world into orders, I sort of got the Higgs at order 100, and here it is at 97, using the same 3/2 rate. I am pretty sure this is the theory of counting.