It is not an unrestricted refutation of every interpretation of quantum mechanics. A different interpretation may organize records, state updates, or physical branching differently. Comparing it fairly requires checking whether it satisfies the same operational premises used by the argument.

The source also distinguishes restricting and normalizing an encoded predictive state from deriving primitive evolution. A mathematically specified update of the realized description does not alone supply the governing law of the underlying Internal Frame count dynamics.

The result identifies a concrete logical commitment in MQ’s measurement account. It can be evaluated by inspecting the premises and the conditional proof rather than by treating the word theorem as experimental confirmation. The July source-era formulation is preserved here with the later source review boundary on the missing dynamical inference.