Factors Beyond Lifespan Dependency on Earth

This study focuses on how optimal assets can be shared for feasible activities and improve harmonic balance among resources by configuring Ideal Protocols in the System Platform. Systems Owners tend to build and distribute the priority of Resource Allocation and ignore pursuing righteousness to share system assets because of the invisible threat of algorithms beyond the Survival Instinct. The Network of the Competitive Instinct, called the Survival Instinct, protects the system platform from external forces.

The first case scenario targets Suboptimal Asset Sharing, which indicates lower security in the entire system layers and attenuates the degree of satisfaction among internal and external beneficiaries. Distinct Resources with deficient allocating assets may move to breakdown mode, and others create a sense of insecurity, anxiety, and imbalance in system environments. Systems Owners are obliged to finance Centralized Control Systems and ignore the Optimal Resource Allocation. 

Observation:

The outcome of Suboptimal Resource Allocation within Social Contexts, among others, is hatred and polarization. The rich get wealthier, and the poor get poorer long-term. According to an observational study, inequality will increase steadily over time. This phenomenon can sustain and cause the annihilation process and immense changes.

The Superego Obstructs Aggressive Instinct Network

The Superego acts as a regulatory barrier, limiting the operational flow of the aggressive instinct network, which causes System Owners to restrict threaden behaviors in operative layers when such behaviors pose perceived threats to the system platform. These restrictions are enforced through security protocols based on global variables that can target complex resources with a badge of economic burdens. As a result, individuals deemed to exhibit "low social competence" may be excluded from normative social functioning. This imposed withdrawal, akin to enforced austerity or hermitage, disrupts instinctual cycles, leaving nodes within the Competitive Instinct Network in an open-loop state.

When instincts are suspended in this Open-loop mode, the Survival Instinct is triggered to rescue and reengage instincts trapped in the domain of deadlock. Algorithmic codes that operate beyond the traditional Superego framework act to prevent complete closure into a Closed-loop state, maintaining a degree of adaptability within defined time intervals.

Security pressures shaped by global variables along the evolutionary trajectory can initiate new Open-loop cycles and introduce tensions within the Subconscious Component. In response, optimal Superego structures are designed to dismantle obsolete behavioral flags and regulate former Open-loop domains to align with emerging time intervals.

Persistent social oppression, driven by global variables, activates the dynamic Superego framework to authorize the Survival Instinct to summon specific instinctual responses to restore a functional Closed-loop mode. However, excessive pressure within the Subconscious Component can create stronger aggressive instincts that manifest as chaos, tragedy, and widespread social disruption.

 

Decision-Making and the Architecture of Instinctual Networks

 

Decision-making processes emerge through the dominant configurations of instinctual networks and instance modules operating within the Subconscious Component. These networks dynamically shape the foundational structure from which behavioral responses and strategic evaluations arise. Among the key modulators of this system are the Superego and Ego frameworks, whose properties significantly influence the architecture of the decision-making map.

The Superego framework imposes regulatory codes, value constraints, and ethical boundaries, often filtering instinctual impulses to align with internalized societal norms. In contrast, the Ego framework mediates between instinctual drives and external realities, managing adaptation through calculated responses. These frameworks interact with instinctual hierarchies to construct decision pathways, weighing internal pressures against perceived external conditions. This complex interplay ultimately defines decision-making processes' direction, coherence, and stability across varying time intervals and environmental contexts.