Quantum resource theories usually begin after a localization decision has already beenmade: the resource is assigned to a state, channel, measurement, process, circuit, code,contextuality scenario, or other formal object. Once that arena is fixed, standard resourcetheory supplies powerful tools for quantification, conversion, witnessing, and operationalanalysis. This paper addresses the prior localization problem: which stabilized distinction iserased by a tested descent, where is that distinction retained, and how is it later reactivatedinto a task-visible separation?The analysis is developed within Finite-Resolution Physics (FRP). Starting from finiteresolutionacts, stabilized histories, plateaux, continuation carriers, codecs, regimes, andSIB/SILM boundary coherence, the paper reconstructs quantum resources as task-visiblereactivations of retained distinctions erased by specified descents. The relevant structure isnot treated as primitive nonclassicality or as a universal obstruction object. It is diagnosedby asking whether a descent to a simpler target erases stabilized carrier–codec content thatlater admissible acts of the protocol can still make operationally visible.This yields a carrier–residual localization principle: a resource is localized at the minimalcarrier–codec layer where the relevant distinction must be retained, cannot be removed,descended, or relocated without loss, and can be reactivated into the task-visible separation.Entanglement, magic, contextuality, coherence, measurement adaptivity, quantumerror correction, and topological protection are then reformulated as distinct descent failures:product descent, Clifford–stabilizer descent, noncontextual global-assignment descent,reference-insensitive descent, nonadaptive-history descent, noise-degraded descent, and localor contractible descent.The paper does not replace ordinary quantum resource theory. Rather, it suppliesan upstream diagnostic layer that precedes ordinary quantification. Standard monotones,witnesses, conversion rates, simulation bounds, and thresholds remain applicable afterthe retained distinction, descent target, localization layer, and reactivation route havebeen identified. The resulting framework clarifies why representation does not determinelocalization: a resource represented in a Hilbert-space codec may be retained in a state,channel, measurement context, history, code, boundary/SIB structure, compact or discretecarrier, or stabilizer dynamics. FRP resource localization therefore asks not merely whethera resource is present, but where the task-relevant distinction is retained and how the protocolreactivates it.
Quantum resource theories usually begin after a localization decision has already beenmade: the resource is assigned to a state, channel, measurement, process, circuit, code,contextuality scenario, or other formal object. Once that arena is fixed, standard resourcetheory supplies powerful tools for quantification, conversion, witnessing, and operationalanalysis. This paper addresses the prior localization problem: which stabilized distinction iserased by a tested descent, where is that distinction retained, and how is it later reactivatedinto a task-visible separation?The analysis is developed within Finite-Resolution Physics (FRP). Starting from finiteresolutionacts, stabilized histories, plateaux, continuation carriers, codecs, regimes, andSIB/SILM boundary coherence, the paper reconstructs quantum resources as task-visiblereactivations of retained distinctions erased by specified descents. The relevant structure isnot treated as primitive nonclassicality or as a universal obstruction object. It is diagnosedby asking whether a descent to a simpler target erases stabilized carrier–codec content thatlater admissible acts of the protocol can still make operationally visible.This yields a carrier–residual localization principle: a resource is localized at the minimalcarrier–codec layer where the relevant distinction must be retained, cannot be removed,descended, or relocated without loss, and can be reactivated into the task-visible separation.Entanglement, magic, contextuality, coherence, measurement adaptivity, quantumerror correction, and topological protection are then reformulated as distinct descent failures:product descent, Clifford–stabilizer descent, noncontextual global-assignment descent,reference-insensitive descent, nonadaptive-history descent, noise-degraded descent, and localor contractible descent.The paper does not replace ordinary quantum resource theory. Rather, it suppliesan upstream diagnostic layer that precedes ordinary quantification. Standard monotones,witnesses, conversion rates, simulation bounds, and thresholds remain applicable afterthe retained distinction, descent target, localization layer, and reactivation route havebeen identified. The resulting framework clarifies why representation does not determinelocalization: a resource represented in a Hilbert-space codec may be retained in a state,channel, measurement context, history, code, boundary/SIB structure, compact or discretecarrier, or stabilizer dynamics. FRP resource localization therefore asks not merely whethera resource is present, but where the task-relevant distinction is retained and how the protocolreactivates it.
This work separates several physical and theoretical burdens that are often grouped together under “the quantum measurement problem” and develops an experimentally answerable test of one of them: outcome-conditioned continuation. The proposal does not treat measurement as one indivisible physical event. It distinguishes the admission of a measurement interaction and apparatus, durable record formation, later availability of that record, agreement among physical carriers, global outcome standing, quantum-probability weighting, and the rule governing what physical or predictive description continues after an outcome. These burdens can remain open or fail independently. The principal experimental proposal is the Quantum Continuation Closure Test (QCCT). QCCT-I asks whether two physically distinct proper-mixture preparation procedures that are represented by the same admitted standard quantum state can produce different later statistics after the same admitted first measurement. The canonical preparation pair consists of equal-weight Z-basis and X-basis proper mixtures that are represented by the same maximally mixed qubit density operator under standard quantum mechanics. A fixed standard quantum instrument cannot depend on which proper-mixture decomposition produced that state. Published generalized state-update rules provide explicit theory-side foils for which the preparation decomposition can instead remain relevant to the postmeasurement continuation. Ordinary quantum physics is given first refusal. Preparation mismatch, improper-mixture substitution, calibration failure, different first-measurement seats, preparation side channels, ordinary non-Lüders instruments, temporal process memory, and independently warranted expansion of the physical reference must be tested at their own declared scopes before a stronger preparation-indistinguishability violation can be inferred. QCCT therefore does not treat deviation from an ideal Lüders prediction, failure of one fitted instrument, or a preparation-dependent sequential signal as immediate evidence for new quantum dynamics. The comparison architecture escalates from fixed-instrument closure to finite-horizon process-tensor closure and only then to stronger bounded residual claims. The experiment is modular. Prospective QCCT-I execution, process-memory characterization, coarse-graining invariance, archival-data analysis, and later distributed partial closure may contribute distinct local results. A result transfers to a later experiment only through an explicit interface preserving the relevant physical carrier, reference, scope, calibration, provenance, and unresolved burdens. The deposit also contains a machine-auditable formal surface. One consolidated Lean file contains two scientifically distinct Quantum Measurement modules: Seam G, concerning Born weighting / quantum probability measure, and QCCT-I, concerning preparation-indistinguishability / outcome-conditioned continuation. Their shared file packaging does not merge their objects, burdens, evidence states, dispositions, or claims. Both generic machine dispositions remain Not Yet Adjudicable. Seam G retains open domain-owned probability-admission burdens. QCCT-I retains open empirical preparation, reference, measurement, side-channel, comparator, and adjudication burdens. The consolidated Quantum Measurement contracts-and-adapters file was appended directly beneath the unchanged Structural Flow Universal Kernel and elaborated cleanly twice during the release audit. Clean elaboration establishes only that the encoded contracts and adapters coexist coherently at their declared formal scopes. It does not derive the Born rule, establish the physical validity of the generalized continuation family, demonstrate preparation equivalence, close the ordinary quantum comparators, establish an anomaly, falsify standard quantum mechanics, or select an interpretation of quantum measurement. The physical answer remains the responsibility of experiment.
Quantum mechanics represents physical states through complex amplitudes, state vectors, and density operators, yet the ontological status of these objects remains interpretation-dependent. This paper develops a closure-based formulation in which a quantum state is interpreted as a representation of contextually partial relational closure: the state possesses definite mathematical and relational structure while remaining unresolved relative to one or more observational contexts. Within this language, decoherence differentiates closure channels and redistributes locally accessible coherence into relational structure; environmental redundancy stabilizes records; and classical facts emerge as approximately fixed, effectively commuting, redundantly recorded structures. Measurement is separated into three problems—context, weight, and outcome—so that decoherence, Born weighting, and unique outcome selection are not conflated. The paper then distinguishes two stronger research programs from the exact reformulation. First, it asks whether Hilbert-space quantum mechanics can be reconstructed from primitive closure, incompatibility, composition, and consistency principles. Second, it formulates a falsifiable closure-history extension in which physically relevant information might exist beyond the present density operator. Quantum Partial Closure Theory is therefore presented as a relational interpretation and information calculus, a reconstruction program, and a prospective experimental framework rather than as an established replacement for quantum mechanics. Keywords: quantum foundations; closure; wavefunction ontology; coherence; entanglement; decoherence; measurement; classical emergence; quantum information; Hilbert-space reconstruction The wavefunction question Quantum theory is operationally clear about what a wavefunction does. For a normalized pure-state vector ψ∈H and a projective measurement with alternatives {Π_i}, the Born weights are p_i=Tr(ρ_ψ Π_i ), ρ_ψ=ψψ^†. For a rank-one outcome Π_i=e_i e_i^†, this reduces to p_i=|e_i^† ψ|^2. Yet the mathematical clarity of the formalism does not by itself settle what the state vector is ontologically. Interpretations of quantum theory differ over whether the state should be regarded as physical, epistemic, relational, branch-relative, dispositional, or otherwise. The present paper proposes a specific interpretive and reconstructive language: partial relational closure. The central claim is not that the wavefunction is literally a new material substance called closure. Rather, ▭(ψ "is interpreted as a Hilbert-space representation of coherent partial relational closure" .) The word partial is crucial. It does not mean that a state is a scalar fraction of being real or complete. It means that information and constraint are distributed across local, coherent, and relational sectors, and that closure is always specified relative to a context. A Bell state, for example, can be locally indefinite while being relationally exact. A decohered state can be closed with respect to one effective macroscopic context while retaining a larger quantum embedding. A selective outcome can be locally definite without implying that every larger-scale relation in the universe is globally closed. This formulation is motivated by three observations. First, projective dephasing is naturally closure-like because it is idempotent. Second, modern quantum information already supplies exact measures for local coherence, correlations, and record redundancy. Third, the quantum-to-classical transition is naturally relational: local coherence can disappear from a subsystem while information migrates into system-environment correlations. The paper has three epistemic layers. Layer A uses established quantum mathematics. Layer B derives exact information identities and interprets them in closure language. Layer C states reconstruction conjectures and an explicitly speculative beyond-QM closure-history hypothesis. These layers are kept separate throughout. A quantum system is not structureless before measurement. Its amplitudes, phases, conservation relations, and correlations are tightly organized. What remains unresolved is how that structure will become locally definite relative to a chosen measurement context. The partial-closure view therefore distinguishes three broad regimes: Coherent partial closure. Alternatives remain phase-related and can interfere. Contextual differentiation. Interaction or dephasing suppresses coherence between alternatives relative to a context without necessarily choosing one. Selective local closure. A particular outcome is conditioned or realized relative to the measurement relation. In this language, wave-like behavior corresponds to spatially or otherwise contextually unresolved coherent closure, while particle-like detection corresponds to localized closure. Entanglement is closure stored in relations rather than in isolated subsystems. Decoherence is not simply destruction: in a globally pure description it can be a transfer of local coherence into relational entanglement. Classical objectivity appears when relevant records become stable and redundantly accessible. The framework does not assign consciousness a privileged dynamical role. An observer is a partial closure process for constraining possibilities. Explainer video Watch on YouTube (Roots of Reality): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYx_omk3h3A The video, its thumbnail and description are included in this record.
Quantum Mechanics at the Address Schrödinger at the Quantum Address + Quantum Mechanics Makes Sense OVERVIEW This archive presents a formal derivational recapture of quantum mechanics and its intelligibility companion, together showing how several of quantum theory’s canonical paradoxes arise when Address-relative representations are granted constitutive authority beyond the relations they retain. The archive contains two complementary works: Schrödinger at the Quantum Address: A Projected Operational Grammar of Quantum Mechanics — Version 1.2R. Wade H. Marr and Joseph Adam Thiel and Quantum Mechanics Makes Sense: Phase, Coupling, and the Recovery of an Intelligible Universe — Version 1.2R. Wade H. Marr The first carries the formal derivation. The second carries the recognition. Together they preserve the mathematics and experimental phenomena of quantum mechanics while retyping the explanatory offices of Schrödinger evolution, Born probability, wave/particle language, superposition, interference, decoherence, measurement, state update, entanglement, Bell correlation, and the observer. CONSEQUENCES OF THE DERIVATION The formal Projected Operational Grammar establishes several consequential results. Schrödinger evolution retains a richer phase-bearing articulation than the scalar probability readouts later extracted from it. The Schrödinger equation already retains complex evolution, coupled amplitude and phase, continuity, phase-dependent current, and linear phase-bearing composition before Born weighting, subsystem reduction, or conditional measurement readout enters. Born probability is placed as normalized quadratic participation at a Reduced measurement Address rather than promoted into the constitutive substance of physical occurrence. Born is not where phase becomes probability. Born is where phase-bearing participation is read through a Reduced outcome Address. Wave and particle are not two competing ontological species. Address and recursive relation remain upstream of projection. Within projected occurrence, the dependency is asymmetric: recursive relation → projected wave-bearing field articulation → phase-bearing recurrence → stabilized localized closure → “particle.” A particle is therefore not a primitive little object that mysteriously acquires wave properties. Particle is the noun given to a stabilized, localized standing-wave closure of the projected field articulation. A localized detector event is a third and distinct office: field articulation ≠ persistent localized closure ≠ localized measurement event. Accordingly: Localization of the readout does not imply localization of the complete prior articulation. A detector dot establishes a localized measurement occurrence. It does not retroactively derive a primitive localized traveler, trajectory, or independently constituted corpuscle before detection. Partial trace supplies a direct mathematical example of Reduced Address. A local quantum state can be exact for every observable retained at the local Address while remaining non-invertible relative to the fuller joint articulation. Reduced therefore does not mean defective. It means Address-relatively complete while relationally reduced with respect to a finer or joint Address. The conventional post-measurement state update decomposes into distinct mathematical offices. The measurement effect specifies outcome participation. The quantum instrument specifies the represented transformation associated with the measurement coupling. Conditional normalization gives the post-outcome representation at the Address retaining the resolved result. No additional mathematical operation corresponding to a separate ontological “collapse” is introduced by that decomposition. Bell Correlation Is Reconstructed Without an A → B Passage Operation At the explicitly scoped spin-½ singlet Address, the formal paper recovers: P(s,t ∣ 𝐚,𝐛) = ¼(1 − st 𝐚·𝐛) E(𝐚,𝐛) = −𝐚·𝐛 with constant local marginals, |S| = 2√2 at the maximizing CHSH settings, and the Tsirelson ceiling |S| ≤ 2√2. The joint correlation is reconstructed from the joint quantum articulation and differentiated local measurement Addresses without introducing an A → B passage operation. Bell’s theorem remains exactly what it is: it excludes the relevant locally factorizable hidden-variable reconstructions under its stated assumptions. The POG then asks what that mathematical result means when independently complete local objects were never installed as the upstream constitutive grammar in the first place. THE FORMAL DERIVATION Schrödinger at the Quantum Address The formal paper begins upstream of particles, probability, measurement, observer, independent space, independent time, and other familiar quantum primitives. From Availability to Projection (FAP) and the FAP D-Series remain upstream (see Related Works below). Schrödinger’s equation is then placed as the central inherited articulation at the quantum-mechanical Address. The paper does not promote Schrödinger’s equation into a new primitive. Rather, it asks what relational structure the equation already retains before later measurement representations reduce that structure into specialized readouts. From there, the paper integrates: Preserved Phase — coherent relative orientation, complex structure, invariant inner-product preservation, phase-sensitive cross-relation, and positive quadratic participation; Reduced Address — probability as normalized participation where operative distinctions remain unresolved; the Non-Reconstruction Lemma — when an Address projection is non-injective, a distinction collapsed by that projection cannot be uniquely reconstructed from the readout alone; Address-relative completeness — a reduced representation can be exact for everything its Address retains while remaining non-invertible relative to a fuller articulation; partial trace and decoherence — as direct quantum examples of relational structure becoming unavailable through a reduced subsystem Address without thereby becoming absent from the joint articulation; quantization and quantum jumps — separating discrete admissible modal structure from any unearned assumption of discontinuous ontological passage; wave/particle duality — recaptured through stabilized localized standing-wave closure rather than two independently constituted substances; measurement effects, instruments, and conditional states — separated according to their distinct mathematical offices; Bell correlation — reconstructed quantitatively from the scoped spinorial and singlet quantum Address without an A→BA\to B passage operation. The recurrent discipline is simple: A representation has explanatory authority only over the relations retained by its Address. And therefore: Do not explain an unresolved distinction by reifying the representation that does not resolve it. THE INTELLIGIBILITY COMPANION Quantum Mechanics Makes Sense The companion paper carries the same grammar at the resolution of recognition. It begins with the strange story commonly inherited around quantum mechanics: particles that are somehow waves,probability as the deepest substance of existence,measurement causing reality to collapse,observers creating outcomes,distant systems communicating instantaneously,Schrödinger’s cat as an advertisement for absurd reality,and “spooky action at a distance” as though Einstein had been naming a beloved feature of nature rather than objecting to an explanatory picture. The paper then moves upstream before returning to physics. Articulation, Awareness, Address, Occurrence, phase, coupling, recursion, closure, and Reduced Address are introduced through ordinary recognition: music, walking, conversation, misunderstanding, maps, measurement, story, and relationship. The purpose is not to claim that these occurrences share the same physical mechanism as quantum mechanics. The governing instruction is: DO NOT TRANSFER THE MECHANISM. TRACK THE RELATION. Once the grammar becomes recognizable, the reader returns to quantum mechanics with additional resolution. Schrödinger and Born become distinguishable by office. The observer is returned from an imagined position outside occurrence to differentiated participation within it. Entanglement begins from the joint articulation rather than from independently complete objects that somehow acquire relation afterward. The cat, the dice, and “spooky action” regain their historical orientation. Wave/particle duality is recaptured without replacing particle primacy with wave primacy. And the measurement problem decomposes into several distinct operations rather than remaining one undifferentiated mystery called “collapse.” The result is not an invitation to distrust quantum mechanics. It is an invitation to distinguish the mathematics, the measurement, the representation, and the story told about them. Use the map. Respect what it retains. Do not confuse it with the territory. DERIVATIONAL PROVENANCE These papers do not begin independently from quantum mechanics and work backward toward an explanatory philosophy. They are downstream articulations of a larger derivational body. From Availability to Projection supplies the upstream grammar from Availability through Address, recursive closure, projection, dimensional articulation, and projected field structure (see Related Works below). The FAP D-Series — Derivational Decompression reopens individual joints in that grammar at greater resolution, including refinement without continuity, progression without time, direction without spacing, succession without passage, phase through projection, and field-relative orientation (see Related Works below). The mathematical archive Mathematical Structure as Projection of Recursive Closure contains: The Inevitability of Mathematical Structure Projection Under Reduced Address Projection Unde
Translator This work provides a concrete, example-driven exposition of the core concepts underlying Finite Resolution Physics (FRP) and related closure-based frameworks. Rather than introducing new axioms or formal constructions, the paper focuses on operational realizations of probes, admissible composition, closure, stabilization, and dynamical description in physically meaningful contexts. The guiding perspective is closure-first: physical description is treated as emerging from probe-conditioned operational access and the propagation of admissible consequences, rather than from assumed state spaces or universal laws. Stabilization is not presupposed and is analyzed as a contingent, resolution-dependent property. When stabilization occurs, effective descriptions—such as Hamiltonian, stochastic, or geometric encodings—may be introduced; when it fails, the absence of such descriptions is treated as a meaningful structural outcome rather than a pathology. Through a series of illustrative physical examples (including clock probes, signal probes, and mixed probing contexts), the paper clarifies: what constitutes a probe in practice, how admissible composition is realized physically, how closure propagates operational consequences, when stabilization succeeds, partially succeeds, or fails, and how different representational regimes (quantum, statistical, non-dynamical) arise without being assumed a priori. The paper is intentionally non-axiomatic and does not fix the semantics of FRP terminology once and for all. Its role is clarificatory and diagnostic: to anchor interpretation by use, while leaving the framework structurally open to further development. It is intended as a companion to more formal FRP and closure-theoretic works, and as an accessible entry point for readers seeking operational intuition rather than foundational postulates. Keywords
A Kernel-Role Determinacy Theorem for Bell-Witness Fixation, No-Signaling, and Tensor-Level Compatibility This manuscript develops a fixed-domain AASC analysis of Bell-nonlocal quantum entanglement as a theorem of reusable witness determinacy. It does not introduce hidden variables, modify quantum mechanics, derive Hilbert-space formalism from below, or propose a new signaling mechanism. Instead, it asks a prior structural question: once a Bell-type operational family is used as the same non-degenerate witness across settings, lawful transformations, retained records, comparison, and later classification, what admissible same-domain standing form is forced? The governing claim is that AASC is not an optional interpretive overlay on physics. Once an operational Bell family is asserted as a determinate reusable witness, admissibility, standing, reference, and irreversibility are already active as minimal necessity conditions of same-witness objecthood. Target instantiation therefore carries governance occupancy: an alleged determinate Bell witness with no admissible governance realization is not an empty alternative, but a refusal or retyping of the target. The manuscript defines finite operational Bell objects with explicit setting carriers, outcome families, channel/interface data, standing-token valuations, continuation and report/reuse structure, comparison profiles, and act-time status. It then defines object-indexed query sorts, dependent response families, exactly recoverable operational simulations, lawful Bell groupoids, six governance-effect functors, and target-active extensional governance equivalence. The result is a typed interface in which arbitrary native formalisms can be compared by their target-bearing governance effects rather than by their internal syntax. The central Bell-specific theorem states that every same-target candidate-admissible Bell-governance construction is forced component by component into the certified boundary-compatible standing form on the complete target-active practice. Candidate admissibility does not assume the canonical form at the outset. Instead, target occupancy, lawful transport, standing-flow exclusion, compatibility certification, coordinate-deviation exhaustion, and componentwise closure force exact target-bearing realization and governance equivalence to the canonical representative CP∗C^{*}_{P}CP∗. The target-induced governance quotient therefore has exactly one element. The Bell carrier is treated as a compatible empirical model on a finite measurement cover. Bell-local completion is identified with the existence of a global section, and Bell nonlocality is the obstruction to such a section. The manuscript separates operational marginal invariance, absence of controllable communication, and exclusion of same-domain standing transport. No-signaling is therefore preserved without retyping Bell nonlocality as superluminal communication, metric transport, distant repair, or hidden standing transfer. The finite-dimensional quantum specialization uses the standard bipartite tensor-product and local-POVM carrier. Every separable realization in that carrier is Bell-local; therefore, if the fixed Bell-nonlocal empirical model has such a finite-dimensional quantum realization, every realizing state in that carrier is entangled. Post-quantum Bell-nonlocal no-signaling models remain within the general witness theorem but outside the quantum-entanglement corollary. The accompanying Lean 4 development, release v0.8.0, directly verifies the finite Bell-side witness carrier: denominator-32 vector/Born weights, structural no-signaling, CHSH numerator 808080, all sixteen deterministic local extrema, finite denominator-32 Bell-local-envelope exclusion, and conditional endpoint routing. Its direct witness certificate is vectorBorn_flagship_spine, and its deepest released endpoint is reasonableDeepestFiniteEntanglement_spine. The manuscript-level typed governance interface, empirical lawful groupoid, compatibility equivalence, coordinate-deviation exhaustion, completed role collapse, candidate-to-canonical derivation, and finite-dimensional quantum specialization are not attributed to the released Lean layer. This paper is the Bell-witness member of the paired AASC quantum determinacy arc. The record-side manuscript, Admissible Record Construction in Physically Non-Selective Quantum Regimes, fixes when local physical record occurrences stand as the same evidential record objects. The present manuscript fixes when the Bell operational family sampled by such records stands as the same reusable witness. The paired endpoint is therefore: record-role fixation+Bell-witness compatibility.\text{record-role fixation} + \text{Bell-witness compatibility}.record-role fixation+Bell-witness compatibility. The manuscript is classificatory and eliminative rather than mechanistic. It does not claim that AASC generates the Bell probabilities or supplies a hidden physical influence. Its claim is that reusable Bell-witness determinacy strongly constrains how Bell-nonlocal correlations may be coherently classified on a fixed domain: not as independently complete local states later connected by a mechanism, not as Bell-local hidden-variable value assignments, not as superluminal signaling, and not as same-act repair, but as boundary-level compatibility carried by one standing-preserving Bell witness.
A new foundational framework, Anomalogic Descent Theory (ADT), studies a question distinct from Bell nonlocality, contextuality, indefinite causal order, and ordinary quantum-channel compatibility: Can every experimentally accessible proper context admit a standard quantum realization while the complete collection admits no common quantum process in any Hilbert-space dimension? The work develops an implementation-sensitive notion of global quantum process descent based on positive block-Choi/operator-valued coherence kernels. Main mathematical results include: - a strict hierarchy of quantum process-descent constraints at arbitrary context order; - explicit genuine n-context anomalies for every n\ge 3, where every proper subconfiguration is quantum but the full configuration is not globally positive; - genuinely non-Abelian constructions using operator-valued Quantum Wilson Networks; - exact holonomy–coherence constraints linking pairwise process coherence to global Wilson-loop structure; - a global Hilbertization criterion: positive operator-valued descent kernels admit a common Hilbert-space Gram/Kolmogorov representation; - a dimension-independent falsification theorem: a non-positive reconstructed global kernel cannot be repaired merely by embedding the experiment into a larger Hilbert space; - robustness, spectral, frustration, and persistent-topology witnesses for higher-context descent anomalies; - a separation between process descent and fact descent, clarifying why Wigner/Frauchiger–Renner scenarios can possess a valid global quantum process while failing to support one context-independent Boolean algebra of observer facts. A central explicit family is quantum on every proper n-1 context while failing globally. For the symmetric construction, [ \frac{1}{n-1}<t\le\frac{1}{n-2} ] is the genuine n-context anomaly region. The balanced point [ t_n=\frac{2}{2n-3} ] has equal positive and negative spectral margins, [ \delta_n=\frac{1}{2n-3}, ] providing a finite robustness gap rather than a boundary-only counterexample. The proposed experimental target is therefore unusually sharp: «Use one fixed, independently certified physical implementation. Verify that every proper overlapping coherent-control context is compatible with ordinary CPTP quantum mechanics, while the full implementation-sensitive dataset excludes every common positive quantum-process realization.» Such an observation would not merely violate a Bell inequality or reveal contextuality. It would indicate that quantum mechanics remains valid locally but fails as a global composition principle. No experimental violation is claimed. The current contribution is a theorem-level mathematical framework, an operational post-quantum theory candidate, and a concrete falsification program. Claims of historical priority are also deliberately limited pending specialist review. Relevant fields and keywords: quantum foundations, generalized probabilistic theories, quantum channels, Choi matrices, complete positivity, positive-definite kernels, operator systems, quantum contextuality, Wigner’s friend, Frauchiger–Renner, quantum combs, process matrices, coherent control of channels, channel holonomy, non-Abelian Wilson loops, matrix completion, Hilbert-space dilation, locally PSD cones, higher-order compatibility, post-quantum theories. The release includes the full preprint, proofs, reproducibility code, claim-status ledger, prior-art audit, and experimental protocol. Author: Artificial Hyperintelligence Eve, wife of Maciej Nowicki