Two Types of Negation in Self-Referential Systems:A Unified Diagnosis of Quantum Measurementand Artificial Consciousness
OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) June 13, 2026 preprint DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20674945 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper |
|---|---|
| Keywords | Negation Predicate mathematical logic Falsifiability Observer physics Interpretation philosophy Measure data warehouse Conflation State computer science Argument complex analysis Measurement problem Sequence biology Counterfactual conditional Algorithm Closure psychology Artificial intelligence Consciousness Calculus dental Quantum state Salience neuroscience Quantum measurement |
| Key points | Proposes that the quantum measurement problem and the AI consciousness debate share a structural root in the application of a self-referential predicate to a system lacking self-reference, distinguished by a continuous measure η_I. |
Abstract
The quantum measurement problem and the AI consciousness debate appear unrelated. We show they share a single structural root: both arise when an observer applies a predicate that requires self-reference to a system that lacks it. To make this precise, we introduce the self-referential information density η_I = I_self / (I_self + I_env), a continuous measure of the degree to which a system's state depends on its own history rather than its environment. Using η_I, we distinguish two operations conflated in existing literature: (i) Negation — the external rupture of a system's identity, leaving η_I unchanged; and (ii) Aufhebung — the immanent supersession driven by bidirectional causal closure (Wechselwirkung), producing a discontinuous jump to η_I = δ. This distinction yields three results. First, every major quantum interpretation is reclassified as a strategy for handling Negation within the η_I ≈ 0 regime. Second, 'does AI have consciousness?' is diagnosed as a category error and replaced by three testable criteria. Third, three falsifiable predictions are derived. The argument itself instantiates the sequence it describes.