Ok here is what I have come up with after last night's thought.
Consider listing out the minimal selfish subsets of

Let

represent a minimal selfish subset.





A few things can be noticed.

is a minimal selfish set
if and only if 
is the smallest element of the set.
Why is this? Consider if there was an element smaller than

in the set

. Call this element

.
Thus there exists subsets of

which contains the element

which could also be a selfish set.
Therefore, if

is the smallest element of the set

then

is a minimal selfish set.
Consider the specific case when

, there are exactly

minimal selfish sets.
Partition the minimal selfish subsets of when

of the set

to those that have

and those that don't.
Those that do not have

are simply the

case which are

Those that do are

. Now note that if we have

for the

case then we have

. However these are now no longer minimal selfish conditions as

is not the smallest element in the set. So if we add

into the subsets

we will change them into minimal selfish subsets that
contains 
.
Summing together the partitions we get

Now let's try generalise this.
Looking at the sequence of

's we have

we see it resembles the Fibonacci sequence, so I am going to conjecture that it does follow the Fibonacci sequence and try to prove it.
Consider for all

, let there be

minimal selfish subsets for the set

. Let there be

minimal selfish subsets for the set

I conjecture that there will be exactly

minimal selfish subsets for the set

.
Let's split our approach in two ways, those subsets of

that contain

and those that do not.
Consider the cases where the subsets does not contain

.
Let

be a minimal selfish subset of

. Then

must also be a minimal selfish subset of

since


There are

minimal selfish subsets of

without the element

Now let us consider the case where the subsets of

that contain

.
Let

be a minimal selfish subset of

.
Let us define

Now notice #

#
)
(Although we changed the number of elements in each set, the total number of sets do not change)

is a minimal selfish subset since

is the smallest element in

.
This produces exactly

minimal subsets of

which contain the element

.
But why does this work? The proof is as follows:
Consider the minimal selfish set
P of the set

that contains the element

.
Now

since



is a minimal selfish subsets since #

#
)
.


If we define

to be the number of the minimal selfish subsets of

and

respectively.
Then we have

