Standardizing

Having discovered the largest efficient sphere, we can simplify by eliminating sources of confusion, like Avogadro and speed of light and Boltzman. We also have choices in setting what the wave number measures, we can say it measures radius P^N for area p^(2N+2); or area of P^(N+1) for radius P^(N/2+1/2) or volume. The SNR came out as a ratio of volume and area so it shouldn't matter one way or the other. The Current Compton standard is radius, but Avogadro is volume.  Compton radius makes sense because it is a symmetry of dimension  one, the lowest integer so to speak.

Then we  say, the largest unit of length is:  1/2 * Phi^107 and the smallest unit of length is 2 * Phi^(-107), where I define Higgs as Phi^107.

Set the smallest packed thing to 1, set the largest thing to Higgs/2 and the smallest fraction to 2/Higgs.   We add the 2 to maintain the Nyquist rate and ensure Higgs quantizes nothing. Then for all the engineering approximations, we can just set a scale on Higgs to make engineering numbers look nice within some range. We really count everything in quantum numbers. But we know all the separability, and symmetry,  and thus know all the general relativity adjustments for the engineering approximations. All computations are done in power spectra and converted to engineering units after the fact, much simpler.

All the Hamiltonians can be written as a function of volume and area:

 H(n,m) where the n and m are quant numbers, shifted depending on whether you want fermions, black body, bosons, or chemical potential.  The generating function is always an exponential polynomial with lines of symmetry based on a defined generating graph. The job of physicists becomes discovering that graph. Relativity is always the case of crossing a node on that graph. Much, much simpler, as Einstein and Heisenberg would say. The coupling constants in the Lie Groups are really just normative functions of imprecision in the most irrational number.