Authors: V.Peretyachenko, O.Krishevich

Framework (procedural, mandatory)

VENDOR is treated as an engineering system operating within classical physics and a standard TRL-based development logic. Public statements about performance do not replace verification; they are replaced by process: measurement protocols, reproducibility criteria, independent validation, and certification gates. Air and the surrounding environment are described exclusively as a working medium and coupling medium, not as an energy source. Quantitative parameters are disclosed only after independent measurement and completion of the relevant validation and certification stages.

The text below is not ideology, advocacy, or persuasion. It is a historically and engineering-accurate description of how technology actually develops: through observable physical effects, stabilization of operating regimes, measurement, reproducibility, and standardization. Theory and formal models evolve in parallel and often arrive later, once a stable practical application framework already exists.

Preface

Modern technology assessment culture has adopted a dangerous illusion: that a complete, closed, and universal theory must exist before engineering application is legitimate. This logic appears scientific, but it does not reflect the real history of engineering or scientific progress.

In most foundational technological shifts, practice, measurement, and reproducibility preceded theoretical completeness. Theory developed as data accumulated and as the need arose to generalize, optimize, and scale systems that were already functioning.

Aviation: Controlled Flight Before Rigorous Aerodynamics

On December 17, 1903, the Wright brothers achieved the first controlled powered flight. Their success was not the result of a complete aerodynamic theory. They worked with incomplete and partially incorrect empirical data, including inaccurate lift coefficient tables available at the time.

The primary driver of progress was iterative engineering: prototypes, measurements, adjustments of shape and angles, and repeated experimentation. Aircraft were considered engineering-valid not because a full theory existed, but because flight regimes were reproducible, controllable, and improvable.

A rigorous theoretical foundation for aerodynamics developed later, once practical necessity emerged to generalize accumulated data and optimize designs. Theory strengthened aviation, but it was not a prerequisite for flight.

Steam Engines: Industrial Revolution Without Thermodynamics

In the eighteenth century, steam engines operated, scaled, and delivered economic value long before thermodynamics existed as a formal science. Engineers did not work with entropy, thermal cycles, or modern conservation laws.

Yet the machines performed work, improved iteration by iteration, and became economically significant. Practice revealed stable dependencies and operational boundaries well before a formal theoretical framework was established.

Thermodynamics emerged in response to an already existing engineering reality. Theory enabled optimization and generalization, but it was not a condition for the industrial revolution to begin.

Electromagnetism: From Experiment to Formal Equations

Electromagnetic phenomena were used in engineering systems before they were unified into a rigorous mathematical framework. Experimental discovery and practical application preceded formal theoretical consolidation.

The equations now considered foundational to electrodynamics served to systematize effects that were already observed and applied. Electric motors and power transmission systems existed as engineering artifacts before a complete theoretical picture was available.

Semiconductors: Industry Before Complete Models

The first transistors and semiconductor devices entered practical use while engineering models still relied heavily on empirical relationships and experimentally derived characteristics. Quantum theory existed, but its applied engineering formulation matured gradually.

The industry scaled on the basis of reproducible effects, controllable parameters, and verified operating regimes. Theoretical understanding deepened in response to practical scaling requirements.

Absence of Explanation Is Not Absence of a Phenomenon

The lack of a complete explanation does not imply the absence of a physical phenomenon. It reflects the current state of knowledge, not a property of reality. Engineering operates on measurable effects, reproducibility, and controllability.

Theoretical completeness and system functionality are distinct levels. It is possible to stabilize a regime, define applicability boundaries, and deploy a system in engineering contexts without a universal theoretical model.

Capital and Industry Follow Reproducibility

Historically, investment and industrial adoption follow stable, controllable, and reproducible effects. Theory is critical for optimization and scaling, but it is not a prerequisite for engineering deployment.

Capital flows toward controlled reality, not toward explanation.

When Demanding Complete Theory Systemically Slows Innovation

Rigid insistence on full theoretical closure before application creates structural delays, eliminates intermediate use cases, disconnects practice from knowledge, and reduces competitiveness.

Engineering science advances through feedback from reality. Without that feedback, theory loses grounding and innovation loses momentum.

Where Theory Is Critically Necessary

Theory is essential for defining applicability limits, predicting behavior in new regimes, optimizing performance, and transferring principles to new systems. However, theory evolves alongside practice, not before it.

VENDOR’s Position in This Context

VENDOR operates within the logic of engineering science. The focus is on stabilizing physical regimes, measurement, reproducibility, and transparent disclosure of applicability limits. A complete first-principles theoretical description is not presented as a prerequisite for engineering validity.

This approach aligns with historical norms of technological development and standard TRL-based validation frameworks.

From Explanation to Measurement

At a certain stage, progress requires not further explanation but independent measurement, verification protocols, validation, and standardization. This stage defines the transition from concept to infrastructure.

Conclusion

The history of technology demonstrates a consistent pattern: engineering often precedes theory. Practice creates the demand for explanation, not the other way around. Requiring complete theoretical closure before recognizing engineering validity systematically slows progress.

VENDOR follows this proven engineering tradition: stabilizing regimes, measuring, validating, and defining applicability boundaries. Theory develops in parallel, strengthening and refining an already verifiable reality.