PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 17, 20260 citationsOpen Access

System of Eternity (SOE): A Non-Terminal Civilizational Governance Framework (V4.3)

View Full Paper
QYQianJun Yu

Key Points

  • The aim is to present a governance framework capable of continuous improvement and stability without collapse.
  • Introduces the System of Eternity (SOE) framework with three layers: Conditions, Architecture, and Evolution.
  • Mathematical model formalized for a trust-based dynamic system with stability and recovery functions derived from simulations.
  • Identifies and resolves five structural gaps through a detailed multi-AI audit.
  • The stability mapping function is now defined as a four-regime piecewise function.
  • Canonical recovery function and operational parameter ranges have been empirically bounded.
  • Resolved dual-failure recovery deadlock with a simulation-backed protected floor value of 0.25.

Abstract

The System of Eternity (SOE) is a non-terminal civilizational governance framework designed to maintain long-term institutional stability while enabling continuous self-adjustment, upgrade, and peaceful replacement. SOE does not propose a final political system — it proposes a governance architecture in which civilization retains the permanent capacity to improve its institutions without collapse. This document presents SOE V4. 2, comprising three layers: Civilizational Conditions (why new governance structures become necessary), System Architecture (the full SOE design including governance modules, decision systems, stability mechanisms, crisis response, and system evolution), and Civilizational Evolution (long-term survival, adaptation, and development). The Dynamic Architecture (Part IX) formalizes the mathematical core: a trust-based dynamic system expressed as dT/dt = −aD + bI − cC + R (T, t), with formal definitions of the stability mapping function g (T), recovery function R (T, t), and parameter operative ranges derived from simulation programs v12–v26. Five structural gaps identified in a multi-AI audit (April 2026) have been resolved in this version: the canonical recovery function R (T, t) is formally defined; parameter operative ranges are empirically bounded; a dual-failure recovery deadlock is resolved via a simulation-backed protected floor κₘin = 0. 25; a verification paradox under high-disturbance conditions is addressed via cross-component consistency checks; and the stability mapping function g (T) is formally specified as a four-regime piecewise function. SOE is designed as a modular open framework. All components are independently functional and may be cited or recombined without reference to the full document.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

QianJun Yu (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a095c2c7880e6d24efe230fhttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20210216
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper