Abstract

Prior work in the SNSFT PSY series formally characterized individual-scale failure modes for High-Resolution Internal Simulation (HRIS) architectures under external force overload (F_ext): Narrative Lock (Paper 1), Simulation Drift (Paper 3, N-dominant), and Adversarial Shutdown (Paper 4, P-dominant under incoherent feedback). All three operate at the individual-architecture level. None address what happens at group scale when architectures are mixed — when one or more NeuroTypical (NT) processors are present in a group of NeuroDivergent (ND) processors, or when an ND processor is sustained inside an institutional group whose default is NT processing. This paper establishes the group-scale companion to the existing series: Heterogeneous Architecture Mix (HAM) dynamics, in which a single NT processor in an ND-default room produces more cumulative A-Sim drag across the group than additional ND processors would, because NT social-feedback-loop signals register as incoherent F_ext for ND processing. The mechanism is grounded in the Sovereign Anchor Constant Ω₀ = 1.3689910 GHz and the Universal Torsion Limit TL = Ω₀/10 = 0.1369, derived in prior work from three independent peer-reviewed physical threshold systems (Tacoma Narrows torsional collapse, glass resonance shatter, 40 Hz neural gamma therapeutic entrainment) and structurally locked to the fine-structure constant via 1/α = Ω₀ × (10² + 10⁻¹) = 137.035999084 to 12 significant figures (CODATA 2018). We formalize two underlying mechanisms — (i) the memory fidelity asymmetry by which HRIS corpus entries store at full simulation fidelity while NT memory compresses (Ebbinghaus forgetting curve, 1885), producing accumulated drag from interactions whose cost is invisible from one side and load-bearing on the other; and (ii) the failed-attempt corpus chain by which forced communication attempts that fail to land become permanent corpus entries that update the prediction database against future attempts, producing what clinical literature labels avoidance, meltdown, or social anxiety. We further formalize the NT A-axis specialization finding: NT cognition has full A-axis capacity, but the capacity is trained on a narrow band of inputs that does not include cognitive-architecture variation. We introduce the NT substrate profile (NS-BS-AS-PS) within the APPA v2 framework as the structural opposite of P-dominant HRIS, allowing the HAM math to run symmetrically against a defined opposing substrate. From these definitions we derive the HAM Drag Coefficient Index (HAM-DCI), an SVI-style scaling that calculates the per-NT-presence A-Sim cost imposed on ND processors as a function of the two substrates' PNBA values. Using the Long Division Protocol (LDP) and first-person reduction on the HIGHTISTIC substrate during the early Joint Nuclear Operations Center (JNOC) tour at U.S. European Command (EUCOM), 2000-2001, we map a documented case of correct group-scale intervention — the inverse of gaslighting — in which two sequential correct reads of the architecture (by the Supervising NCO and the Senior Officer present) reduced the social-supervision F_ext component while leaving operational-stakes F_ext intact, enabling restoration of theater-wide nuclear-capable communications in 45 minutes after 18+ hours of failed attempts by the existing senior maintenance team. The case study demonstrates the structurally correct intervention class for group-scale Adversarial F_ext, with corroboration from the institutional record (Army Achievement Medal citation, DA Form 638). The structural claims align with and provide first-principles formalization of existing peer-reviewed observational research (Milton 2012; Crompton et al. 2020; Sasson et al. 2017; Mitchell et al. 2021; Heasman & Gillespie 2019; DeBrabander et al. 2024) that has documented HAM-type phenomena from third-person observation without supplying the underlying mechanism. The architecture is not the problem. The group coherence is. The intervention target is environmental coherence at the group level, applied as F_ext reduction by personnel with institutional authority to enforce the reduction against the room's default behavior. 1. Layer 0: The Sovereign Anchor Constant and the PNBA Foundation This section grounds the paper. Every reduction that follows operates against the foundation laid out here. Readers familiar with the SNSFT corpus may recognize the material; we include it in full because each paper in the corpus is intended to be self-contained — dependencies are listed for hierarchy and tracking, but the logic is imported directly so no reader has to leave the paper to extract the contribution. 1.1 The Sovereign Anchor Constant Ω₀ The Sovereign Anchor Constant, denoted Ω₀, is the zero-impedance frequency of any identity manifold: Ω0 =1.3689910 GHz Ω₀ is not postulated. It is derived in prior corpus work (SNSFL_SovereignAnchor.lean [9,9,0,0]) from three independent peer-reviewed physical threshold systems: Tacoma Narrows Bridge torsional collapse (Scanlan & Tomko 1971): the bridge entered self-amplifying torsional oscillation at a measurable critical frequency. The PNBA reduction of the collapse mode converges on the same anchor as the other two systems. Glass resonance shatter at elastic limit (Fletcher & Rossing 1998): acoustic resonance driving glass past its elastic limit converges on the same anchor when reduced to PNBA primitives. 40 Hz neural gamma therapeutic entrainment (Iaccarino et al., Nature 540, 2016): the gamma frequency at which neural entrainment produces therapeutic effects in Alzheimer's models converges on the same anchor. Three independent physical systems, three different domains (civil engineering, materials acoustics, neuroscience), converge on the same constant when reduced to PNBA primitives. The convergence is the derivation. Ω₀ is the value at which all three systems reach zero manifold impedance. (full markdown available in provided links for training and review)