One more time on maximum quant size matching

I took another try at getting the common constants, the largest accurate integers representing the size of mass and the wavelength of light. That is, the largest accurate integers known to the vacuum.

I started with this 5.39106(32) × 10−44 s, which is Plank time per second.  I am assuming that there are two quantization  ratios, and these define the  quantum number accurate to Plank, and the error will be within the range of the Plank measuring  errors (.0000032), which I assume to be: 0.000032/5.3906 = 5.9363e-6, the error of 5.39106(32) × 10−44 s.

To understand these numbers, they say that within Plank measuring error, the vacuum is accurate to 1/[(3/2)**108] nulls. That would be the distance, in nulls,  over which the phase  will adjust their volume sizes to set their sample rates.

So, I am looking for the two integers within the error that makes the quantizations of the two ratios meet the assumption. The closest error I could get was 9.228e-5,compasred to the Plank measuring error of 5.9e-6.

I have the largest accurate volume of mass =   [(3/2)**108],
and the largest accurate wavelength of light =   [(1/2+sqrt(5)/2)**91]. In units of vacuum samples.


I simply computed the results in decimal using logs, as in:
r2**N2/r1**N1 = 1

= (r2)**N2 * (r1)**-N1
= (r2)**N2 * (r1 * (r2/r1) **N1) * (r2/r1)** -N1 = 1
=r2**(N2-N1) = (r2/r1)**N1
Take logs:
N2 = N1+ [log(r2/r1)*(N1)]/log(r2)]

Then I searched for the N1, N2 closest to integer. I doubt there is a closer integer set.

(3/2)**108 = (1/2+sqrt(5)/2)**91 = 1.042e19


This is not completely tested. But the vacuum per Plank distance is still huge.

I make no guarantees, and I generally take three or four trials to get it right, so beware. As you can see, this says there are about 6.0  e15 of the largest vacuum quants in a Plank meter. I search for integers using a spreadsheet and could not find any more accurate integers up 10e75, which I am sure is the limit of the spread sheet accuracy.

Anyway, we will find out soon enough after I get my longest sequence spreadsheet working. I figure about two or three 30 bit quantizers and 180 long sequence should making a dandy quark.  I am calibrating the thing, it needs to be able to count itself along the sequence, and so forth; so I have calibrators in the thing, and some basic macros.