OK, then, where is the sample rate of light on my spectral chart?

Lets find the light sample rate as a singlet line of symmetry, a point on the X axis of a 20 bit computer.

It seems the clock phase error is about .001 per  the Higgs baud rate. Converting from a count of things in a sphere (third moment = baud rate) to a clock rate (tick mark on the X axis) is a collapse of the third moment to the first moment. The second and third moments are left in the group structure.

The proton itself is 16 bits (groups) plus about 4-6 bits of W and K boson counters, call it a 20 bit computer with a Higgs Baud rate. Give the vacuum two bits to do quantum entanglement. The electron is a 19 bit adder only, I think.

The proton obviously figured out Nyquist, so Higgs is likely two or three times the light rate. The proton treats light as noise in a Shannon guassian channel. That gives light the wave around 113 or 127, the most likely primes, but because light is irrational it will not have a single wave number, and will likely range between two primes. Given the circumstance, I guess around 113, to 127, which is a variation of about .001 per Baud. The wave number should vary along the singlet axis as the curve of the finite number line used.

Should I have done the estimation in the first,second, or third moment?  I think that once we start working in Higgs Bauds, then we have linearized to the first moment. A baud is a third moment.  Like Einstein, converted energy, a third moment, to frequency, a measure in the first moment.

I could easily be off in my description of moments, but not off in the method.  Remember, there is an Avogadro of single bit processors that comprise the system, of which at least (3/2)^19 are electron adders; and I think, (3/2)^7 quark adders plus fractional multiplies of 1/11.  Most of the multiply unit is the 20 bits of Gluon and Boson. It looks like spin is a one bit multipler (2 and 1/2) There is actually 1/2 wave action inside the packed Nulls, reflected back out as a 2 multiplier of wave motion. I have not sorted this out, it could be a two bit quantity, or a 1 bit multiplier and 1 bit adder.

I have previously estimated the third moment of light as 10e54, Plank estimates the third moment of light.  But Plank converts that estimate into engineering units, which are first, second and third moments. That is why the Planks curve is an ungodly mess. The X axis on Plank seems to be a first moment measure, however. So whern MIT reports the coldest point on the X axis is 6e6, I am tempted to think that is the first moment estimate.

Try reconciling all the methods and you will do much better than I have done here. The best approach is to treat the first moments as tick marks on three curved, finite orthogonal axis.  Then the second and third moments are circular grids and spherical grids composed of power series (finite log)  of the singlet axis tick marks. The number line theorists owe us a set of algebra rules that we can do with exponents on a finite number line.