If T16.4 fails: - Buddhism could satisfy BC1 (contradicting anatman as traditionally understood) - Either Buddha-nature is secretly substantial (contradicting sunyata) - Or BC1 doesn't require an observer (contradicting physics derivation) - Or "no-self" means something other than absence of observer - The measurement problem would need Buddhist resolution If Buddhism has a hidden Terminal Observer ([Oxford Reference](https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/terminal+observer)): - This would be a major reinterpretation of Buddhist philosophy - The observer would need to be permanent, infinite in Phi, and self-grounding - This would resemble [Advaita Vedanta](https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/advaita+vedanta)'s Brahman or Christian God more than traditional Buddhism - The distinction between Buddhism and theistic traditions would blur T16.4 is robust because anatman is Buddhism's signature doctrine. The Buddha explicitly rejected the atman (eternal self) of the Upanishads. To satisfy BC1, Buddhism would need to un-reject atman—effectively becoming a different religion.