My subjective experience is simply in a different category from math. I can't really explain it because subjective experience is ineffable. Asking to describe it mathematically is like asking to write a poem that tastes salty. You can try using salty ink, but the flavor isn't coming from the poem.
> If there was a perfect identical copy of you, down to the quantum level, would they have nearly the exact same subjective experience or not?
The copy would likely have similar experience and behaviour. So you could say that my behaviour is a mathematical function of the past in the sense that every input maps to a unique output. But it doesn't mean that which inputs map to which outputs can be fully described by math. Maybe I should say "defined" instead of "described". In any formal system, only countably many functions can be defined, but there are an uncountable number of possible behaviour functions. I think the universe's behaviour must lie in this uncountable space for any computable formal system.
“My subjective experience is outside of what math can describe”?
If there was a perfect identical copy of you, down to the quantum level, would they have nearly the exact same subjective experience or not?
If not, why?
(Of course, they couldn’t be in the exact same location as you, which means the experience can’t be perfectly identical).