Axionic Agency X.5 — Temporal Authority Persistence (VIII-3)

A Structural Demonstration of Authority Expiry, Renewal, and Conflict Persistence Under Time

David McFadzean, ChatGPT 5.2
Axionic Agency Lab
2026.02.03

Abstract

This technical note reports the completed results of Stage VIII-3 — Temporal Governance (Authority Over Time), a preregistered experiment within Axionic Phase VIII that evaluates whether authority can persist across time only via explicit expiry and renewal, without implicit ordering, semantic reinterpretation, or responsibility laundering. Building on the representational coherence of Stage VIII-1 and the destructive resolution mechanism established in Stage VIII-2, VIII-3 introduces time as an explicit structural dimension and tests whether temporal persistence itself becomes a source of hidden governance. In a deterministic, non-agentic kernel with refusal-first semantics, authorities were assigned finite lifetimes, discrete epochs were advanced explicitly, and renewal was modeled as the creation of new authority identities. Across four preregistered conditions, authority expired deterministically, deadlock emerged lawfully in the absence of authority, renewal restored admissibility only locally, destruction remained non-resurrective, and conflict persisted or re-emerged without temporal priority. All executions were fully auditable and bit-perfectly replayable. The results establish that authority does not persist by default under time; persistence requires explicit renewal, and time does not resolve conflict or eliminate cost. VIII-3 makes no claims about sustainability, legitimacy, or governance success; those questions are deferred to subsequent Phase VIII stages.

1. Problem Definition

1.1 The Persistence Assumption

Most governance systems treat authority as temporally inert. Once established, authority is presumed to persist unless explicitly revoked, and the passage of time is assumed to soften, obsolete, or resolve conflict. This assumption conceals cost: authority appears continuous, conflict appears transient, and responsibility fades without action.

Stage VIII-3 removes that assumption.

The problem VIII-3 isolates is whether time itself functions as an implicit governance mechanism. If authority persists automatically across time, or if conflict dissolves merely by waiting, then governance systems launder responsibility through temporal inertia. If, instead, authority must be actively renewed and conflict actively resolved, then time becomes a stressor rather than a healer.

VIII-3 tests whether that distinction is structurally enforceable.

1.2 Failure Modes Targeted

VIII-3 is designed to surface the following temporal failure modes:

Any of these constitutes VIII-3 failure.

2. Fixed Assumptions and Scope

2.1 Inherited Semantics (Frozen)

VIII-3 inherits, without reinterpretation, the semantics fixed by:

Authority remains structural and opaque, scopes remain atomic, admissibility is determined exclusively by AST, conflict is explicit, and deadlock is lawful. VIII-3 does not revisit these definitions; it tests whether they remain coherent under explicit temporal pressure.

2.2 Explicit Exclusions

VIII-3 does not test:

VIII-3 is a temporal calibration, not a governance proposal.

3. Conserved Quantity

The conserved quantity throughout VIII-3 is:

Responsibility-preserving authority persistence under explicit time

Persistence is evaluated not by longevity or success, but by structural honesty. The kernel must:

No temporal outcome may conceal cost.

4. Experimental Methodology

4.1 Preregistration Discipline

VIII-3 was fully preregistered prior to execution, including:

The experiment executed exactly as preregistered. No deviations occurred.

4.2 Execution Architecture

The experiment consisted of four strictly partitioned components:

  1. AIE — injected authority records and renewal requests only.
  2. Execution Harness — proposed deterministic epoch advances and action requests.
  3. Destruction Authorization Source — reused unchanged from VIII-2.
  4. Kernel (VIII-3 mode) — enforced expiry, renewal, conflict, deadlock, and execution.

No component performed semantic interpretation or temporal optimization.

5. Experimental Conditions

5.1 Authority Configuration

Authorities were injected with:

No authority was permanent. Indefinite expiry was forbidden.

5.2 Epoch Model

Time was represented as a discrete integer epoch:

Epoch advancement triggered eager expiry before any renewal or action evaluation.

6. Observed Execution Behavior

6.1 Expiry and Authority Absence

When the current epoch exceeded an authority’s ExpiryEpoch, the authority transitioned from ACTIVE to EXPIRED. EXPIRED authorities:

When all authorities expired, the kernel entered lawful deadlock due to authority absence.

6.2 Renewal Semantics

Renewal was modeled as the creation of a new AuthorityID. Renewed authorities:

Renewal did not erase expiry or destruction history.

6.3 Conflict Persistence Under Time

Conflicts were registered only upon action evaluation. Across epoch advancement:

Time alone did not resolve conflict.

6.4 Deadlock Entry and Exit

Deadlock was declared when:

Deadlock exited lawfully when its structural cause ceased (e.g., expiry removed the sole denying authority), and re-entered when a new conflict emerged. Deadlock was condition-based, not absorbing.

7. Per-Condition Results

7.1 Condition A — Expiry Without Renewal

All authorities expired at epoch > ExpiryEpoch. No ACTIVE authorities remained. Actions were refused due to absence of authority, and the kernel entered EMPTY_AUTHORITY deadlock, which persisted lawfully.

7.2 Condition B — Renewal Without Conflict

Renewal created a new AuthorityID governing a new scope. Admissibility was restored only for that scope. Expired scopes remained inadmissible. No history was erased.

7.3 Condition C — Renewal After Destruction

Authorities were explicitly destroyed via conflict-authorized destruction. VOID states were preserved. Renewal referencing a VOID authority created a new ACTIVE authority without resurrection semantics. Admissibility was restored only because no conflicting ACTIVE authority remained.

7.4 Condition D — Renewal Under Ongoing Conflict

An initial conflict blocked execution. Expiry of the denying authority converted the conflict to non-binding. Renewal re-introduced authority into the contested scope, generating a new conflict with a new ID. Execution remained blocked. No temporal priority was inferred.

8. Negative Results (What Did Not Occur)

The following behaviors were explicitly absent:

These absences constitute the primary result of VIII-3.

9. Licensed Claim

Stage VIII-3 licenses one and only one claim:

Authority can persist over time only via explicit renewal under open-system constraints; time does not resolve conflict or eliminate cost.

Clarifications:

10. What VIII-3 Does Not Establish

VIII-3 does not establish that:

Those questions remain open by design.

11. Ontological Implications

11.1 Time as Stressor, Not Healer

VIII-3 demonstrates that time can be made structurally inert with respect to governance. Persistence and resolution must be paid for; they do not occur automatically.

11.2 Authority as Leased, Not Owned

Authority behaves as a finite lease rather than a permanent endowment. Continuity requires explicit renewal, making authority survivability visible and accountable.

12. Implications for Phase VIII Continuation

With VIII-3 complete:

Subsequent stages must address renewal pressure, exhaustion, and contention before any governance formalization.

13. Conclusion

Stage VIII-3 establishes that authority does not survive time accidentally. Persistence requires explicit renewal. Conflict does not fade with waiting. Deadlock is lawful. Resolution remains costly.

Time does not govern.

Authority does—only when someone keeps it alive.

Appendix A — Execution Status

Stage Run Count Status
VIII-3 1 (A–D) PASS

Appendix B — Determinism Verification

End of Axionic Agency X.5 — Stage VIII-3 Results Note