When Stability Is Just a Sampling Rate: Scale-Time Theory 10.0 What if the boundary between quantum uncertainty and classical solidity were not only a matter of size or energy, but also of sampling depth? Scale-Time Theory 10.0 explores exactly this possibility. The framework begins not with space as a container, but with one primitive signal-processing-like structure: a global phasor sweep with invariant frequency and invariant carrier speed. From this, a light-calibrated travel step follows. Scale radius, scale address, system baselines, observer reference planes, sampling, aliasing, and stroboscopic lock are then built on top of this foundation. The central intuition is simple: Scale does not change the speed of the carrier. Scale changes the length of the path opened under that speed. Larger scale radii contain more path per shared angular cycle, while the carrier relation itself remains fixed. From this one move, the framework explores distance, delay, apparent size, and containment as selected-reference appearances rather than primitive starting points. The conceptual centerpiece is stroboscopic lock: the stabilized appearance of coherent phase-overlay relative to a chosen baseline. Residual mismatch appears as aliasing. Near the first Nyquist-compatible relation, a standing scale mode is only minimally resolved, producing quantum-like ambiguity and spin-like behavior. At deeper oversampling, through a deep alias-suppression node toward a stable octave-lock node, that same residual phase structure can persist as organized, classical-looking orientation. In this language, the transition from uncertainty to stability becomes a change of sampling regime. The lock nodes are presented openly as defined ideal markers of a dyadic sampling ladder, not as derived constants or numerology. The framework is also clear that the next step must be computational testing. From the same baseline grammar, Scale-Time Theory 10.0 sketches further correspondences: native scale position as rest-mass-like invariant structure, scale-shift into a longer synchronized path lane as energy-like and acceleration-like appearance, gravity-like behavior as baseline drift around a dominant stroboscopic focus, and redshift-like or horizon-like effects as phase-lapse near an orthogonal boundary. This is not presented as a replacement for quantum theory, relativity, or standard cosmology. Those remain the tested languages of modern physics. Scale-Time Theory 10.0 offers a new perspective on how an underlying pre-geometrical scale-space could connect them: quantum-like behavior and relativistic-looking behavior may be different sampling and readout regimes of one phasor-ordered domain. In this view, sampling, aliasing, lock, scale address, baseline drift, containment, and phase-lapse become a unified vocabulary for exploring how the quantum and relativistic pictures might arise from different effective scale-depths and readout speeds. The next step is not rhetoric, but simulation. Simple phasor-sampling models should either reveal stable lock nodes and weak-to-strong resolution transitions, or they should not. That testable direction is what makes the framework worth a careful read. Whether or not one finds the central analogy persuasive, building an entire interpretive architecture from one primitive signal-like relation, and then asking to be tested by it, is a worthwhile exercise in theoretical imagination. The complete framework, including the full relation chain and glossary, is available open access under CC BY 4.0. Read the full PDF: scaletimedynamics.com/en/sca… #ScaleTimeTheory #PreGeometry #QuantumClassicalBridge #SamplingTheory #StroboscopicLock #ScaleSpace #TheoreticalPhysics