References:
1. https://scienceinpoland.pap.pl/en/news/news%2C30403%2Caskscientist-what-smaller-quark.html
2. https://www.gov.pl/web/science/grzegorz-wrochna

Dear Undersecretary of State, Prof. Dr. Grzegorz Wrochna:

On 27 July 2018 Ludwika Tomala asked you
about quarks (Reference 1) and you replied,
“We do not have a theory that would predict
that there are any constituents of quarks. There
was no need to create such a theory,
because so far no physical phenomena
have suggested the existence of such constituents.”

In 1899 Max Planck calculated base units of length and time.
Apparently in 1874 George Johnstone Stoney (Dublin) did it first. Even
though most scholars thought the numbers were too small to matter, a
few capable scholars used these numbers effectively. In 2001 Frank
Wilczek (MIT, Nobel 2004) argued their case most effectively. Today we
recognize their place and importance.

In 1899 when the best calculation for the speed of light was Rosa and Dorsey’s 1907 work,
it rendered 299,710 ±30.  Earlier Léon Foucault was at 298,000±500.

Planck Length: 1.616229(38)×10^-35.(m) and Planck Time is 5.39116(32)×10^-44 seconds.
Max Planck’s two calculations, rendered results that were closer than anybody else’s until
1972 with Evenson et al using laser interferometry arrived at 299,792.4562
Planck using just his base units was at 299,792.438
Close enough.

We applied base-2 to the Planck base units and encapsulated the universe within 202 notations: https://81018.com/chart/ We are still wrestling with Planck Temperature, yet the first 64 notations brings
us up within the quark-neutrino measurements. That playground of 64 notations warrants our close attention as a playground for string, M-theory, Langlands programs and so much more.

Interesting?
Thank you.

Warmly,
Bruce