>Anything that is able to be measured is able to experience.

I was quite liking this explanation but you lost me here. I very strongly agree with your opening, and I think it's the key to everything. I think everyone insisting on a categorical divide runs into impossible problems.

And a good explanation of consciousness has to take the hard problem seriously, but doesn't have to agree that subjective and objective, or first person in third person or whatever you want to call them, are irreducibly distinct categories. But I think it makes more sense to say that some subset of all of the objective stuff out there is simultaneously subjective, rather than saying that all stuff at all times is both objective and subjective. I don't think an apple experiences gravity the way a mind experiences a conscious state, but I do think the through line of understanding them both as importantly physical in the same sense is key to tying physical reality to explanation of conscious states.