Apparently, no one is doing any research on the use of quadrupole convolution. (If any people are, they have kept word of it off the Web, or they refer to it in very different terms.) Any work that you do on it will be original and interesting.
Experimenters in these fields are very clever at making up illusions and ambiguous situations, exposing humans or other animals to them, and inferring, from the reactions, remarkable insights into how the subjects’ nervous systems work. They have also made remarkable achievements by monitoring responses in the subjects’ brains, through electrodes and through various forms of tomography.
They could learn a lot by comparing the responses they measure to the responses of Quadrupole Convolver.
The little work that has been done on quadrupole convolution for optical character recognition strongly suggests that
The biggest failure of contemporary technology is the inability of computers to perform tasks that require visual understanding of everyday environments. Quadrupole convolution can help close this gap.
The supposed derivation of the equation for linearity is not mathematically rigorous. It is more like a rationalization for the use of a familiar equation. It is not so much a derivation as a conjectural explanation of the intriguing results from its use.
It is entirely possible that other solutions of Laplace’s equation are also important in vision. It is entirely possible that other field equations are important in vision. These are excellent possibilities for work in theoretical physics.
Once more than one field is conceived, there is also the possibility of interaction between two fields, like the interaction between electric and magnetic fields in Maxwell’s equation.
Up to Quadrupole Convolution.