Project status — Closed in July 2026. Following a subsequent technical and literature review, the author no longer considers BCT’s proposed falsifiability and empirical claims scientifically supported. This website remains online as an archive of the project.

Phase 2 • main DOI package + wider corpus

A disciplined account of observer-definiteness, grounded in physical records.

BCT defines an experienced state as an agent-relative equivalence class of global states (i.e. underlying micro-realizations of the total system) that are indistinguishable under the agent’s physical access and stable record structure; “collapse” is the discrete update of that class when stable record structure changes.

Plain-text summary Read the Manifesto Main Zenodo DOI Zenodo record (direct) Document pack

No modified Schrödinger dynamics No consciousness-causes-collapse mechanism Non-elastic observer-definiteness Explicit defeat conditions

Overview

Decoherence explains why interference becomes practically unavailable and why macroscopic records become robust. BCT adds a tighter identity-and-definiteness layer: it makes observer-definiteness explicit, record-based, and non-elastic. Phase 2 also states a narrow empirical wedge instead of hiding behind interpretive looseness.

What BCT is

An interpretational / ontological framework in which experienced state is an agent-relative equivalence class, outcomes are record-defined macro-conditions, and collapse is a class update rather than a new force.

What BCT is not

Not an objective collapse dynamics. Not a semantic or knowledge-triggered collapse story. Not a universal single narrative valid for all agents at all stages.

What would hurt it

Carefully controlled negative results in the retention-driven bridge: no organization by retention near threshold, persistence-with-interference, or clean decoherence-only dominance under preregistered controls.

The core move

Treat the agent as a finite physical system with bounded access and finite integration. Two global states may differ microscopically and still belong to the same experienced state for agent A if those differences are not accessible through the agent’s operational interface and if the values of stable-for-A records are unchanged.

Experienced state = an equivalence-class label [Ψ]A over global states
Bit-collapse = a discrete class-label update when stable accessible record structure changes

Access (no semantics)

“Accessible” means physically coupled to the agent’s observables, memory channels, and finite integration window. It does not mean human-readable and it does not mean introspectively noticed.

Stable records

Stable records are accessibility-constrained, persistence-constrained, and robust enough to refine the agent’s experienced label. Many micro-realizations can therefore support one experienced state until record structure splits.

Collapse criterion (operational)

In Phase-2 bridge language, BCT does not say that any visibility loss confirms collapse. The narrower claim is this: once verified which-way information is genuinely present at or above threshold, event-like definiteness should depend on sufficiently stable downstream record formation.

verified I_WW ≥ I_c and record persistence / retention sufficient for event-like stability

Here I_WW is independently verified which-way information in the relevant record channel. The retention side is organized by persistence and loss variables such as τ_p, τ_loss, τ*, and the stability proxy s = R · τ_loss. τ* is treated as an operational, agent-dependent threshold rather than a universal constant.

Falsifiability program

Phase 2 commits in advance to a single bridge: measurement-like interaction → record formation → record persistence → experienced definiteness. The key methodological upgrade is independent calibration: record-channel quantities should be measured independently rather than inferred from the visibility curve they are meant to explain.

Experiment 1

Fixed which-way marking plus a tunable downstream record buffer. Scan τ_loss across a near-threshold region and compare threshold-like vs smooth families under preregistered model competition.

Experiment 2

Two-parameter mapping in the (R, τ_loss) plane. The question is not whether some hardware knob changes visibility, but whether any transition aligns with the organizing variable s = R · τ_loss.

Controls and defeats

Marker-off control, arm isolation, independently verified I_WW, and explicit defeat conditions: no retention organization, persistence-with-interference, decoherence-only dominance, or failure of s-scaling.

BCT vs Many-Worlds (MWI)

BCT is compatible with global unitarity, so the disagreement with Many-Worlds is not “unitarity versus collapse”. The disagreement is about definiteness and counting. BCT blocks the silent inference “many micro alternatives ⇒ many subjects”. Distinct experienced states require distinct stable record conditions for the relevant agent.

Dimension	MWI (broadly)	BCT (Phase 2)
Core move	Keep unitarity; apparent collapse is branch-relative / effective	Keep unitarity; collapse is an agent-relative class-label update tied to stable records
Multiplicity	Branch structure is central	Many micro-realizations can share one experienced label until stable records differentiate them
Observer issue	Often handled through branch-relative self-location or future continuers	Observer-definiteness is made explicit via access, integration, and record structure
Empirical status	Usually interpretive only	Usually interpretive, except for the narrow retention-driven wedge

FAQ (without handwaving)

BCT separates two claims: a disciplined ontology of experienced state and a narrow, killable bridge about record persistence and event-like definiteness. The bridge can lose cleanly even if global dynamics remain unitary.

No mental causation is assumed. “Experienced state” is defined operationally via physical access and stable records. The physics may remain unitary; the update is about class membership, not about an extra force.

No. BCT accepts that global unitarity may hold, but refuses to count subjects or observer-worlds more finely than record-based differentiation allows.

In BCT, “bit” means an effective physical distinction in a record channel under finite resources and accessible measurements. It does not mean that anyone interprets or understands the difference.

Phase 2 treats τ* as an operational threshold tied to retention and integration, not as a universal human-like constant. The role is load-bearing; the numerical value is substrate- and agent-dependent.

No. Later degradation changes later records and therefore later experienced states. It does not retroactively erase the earlier class update once the relevant record structure had already become fixed for the agent.

Wider BCT corpus

This website centers the main Phase-2 package, but BCT now spans a wider set of deposits. The main package should be read together with specialized, exploratory, and philosophical extensions rather than mistaken for the whole corpus.

Main package

DOI 10.5281/zenodo.19661258
Canonical Phase-2 consolidation: manifesto, glossary, flagship, falsification package, Born note, comparison note, objections, τ* note, and README.

Related deposits

Informational Identity, Born Measure, and the Arrow of Time
BCT Gravity: An Exploratory Technical Note
RTP: The Record Threshold Principle

Exploratory and philosophical

BCT Exploratory Package (Level-3)
BCT Philosophical Working Papers I
Against Unpriced Worlds

Documents

Main package hosted here for frictionless access. Source of record: DOI • Zenodo. Peer-reviewed publication: Quantum Speculations 8(1), 20–24 (2026) — IJQF page • PDF. Legacy filenames and URLs are intentionally kept alive for continuity.

Core Phase-2 package

Manifesto

manifesto_phase2.pdf
Front-door statement of the Phase-2 position.

Glossary

bct_glossary.pdf
Canonical terminology and notation.

Flagship

flagship_phase2.pdf
Integrated Phase-2 paper centered on Axiom 0 and the retention-threshold program.

Falsification Package

bct_falsification_package_phase2.pdf
Calibration logic, decision rules, and defeat conditions.

Born note

born_rule_note_phase2.pdf
Conditional Born-route via record-defined macro-conditions.

BCT vs MWI

bct_vs_mwi_comparison.pdf
Clear comparison of ontology, definiteness, and multiplicity.

Objections / Responses

objections_responses_phase2.pdf
Highest-value objections and structural replies.

τ* note

taustar_not_anthropic_note.pdf
Why τ* is operational, not anthropic.

README

readme_phase2_main_package.pdf
Canonical map of the main DOI package.

Philosophical and exploratory extensions

The A=A Problem

a_a_problem_for_everettian_branching.pdf
Informational identity, subject-individuation, and Everettian observer-counting.

Record-Based Subjectivity

record_based_subjectivity.pdf
Identity, difference, and continuity in informational experience.

Superposition, Records, and Difference

superposition_records_difference.pdf
Toward a record-based ontology of quantum definiteness.

Against Unpriced Worlds

against_unpriced_worlds.pdf
Observer-equivalence and ontological economy in Everettian branching.

Level-3 draft

bct_level3_revised_working_draft.pdf
Coherence-filtered typicality, white-rabbit suppression, and open proof obligations.

The Selection Problem

selection_problem_in_informational_ontologies.pdf
Why coherent histories? A partial Level-3 pressure map and response.

Machine-readable index

llms.txt • metadata.json
Retrieval-oriented metadata and document map.

Published note

ijqf.org/archives/7974
Quantum Speculations 8(1), 20–24 (2026). PDF

Contact

Email: batoritranslation@gmail.com
Main package: DOI • Zenodo

Critical objections, replication attempts, and negative results are welcome. If you cite or critique BCT, please reference a specific document and section where possible.