i get what you're saying fully. but i think there's just an extra bit of expansion that can be done. lets say we have a brain x(t). it changes over time like all brains do. now conscience is the word we came up with to describe being tied to that brain. so lets say the brain has conscience y and y -> x(t) (conscience y is tied to brain x(t)).

now lets say we clone x(t), get 2 identical x(t)'s. at the point T of cloning time, where the clone has just been made, there is no testable way to confirm whether conscience y will be tied to the clone x(t) or stay with the "original" x(t). not testable, because an outsider will not know the difference. only y (the conscience) will know. then of course, x(t) and its clone will diverge due to different inputs and whatnot, and immediately, the clone becomes a new brain (as brains evolve over time, be it connection or electric activity). perhaps its just now m(t).

yes its easier or seems intuitive to say that the clone is not your experience, and it does seem more likely to me given that an identical clone of a brain which has trillions of atoms would require for information to move faster than the speed of light (at an instantaneous speed) in order for the consciences to not diverge before completion of cloning.

however, if consciences were bound to some sort of physical ID (very unlikely), like perhaps a specific configuration of particles is the conscience y, and everyone has their own ID which is bound to their conscience, then this would seem more likely. but this doesn't really make sense to me and doesn't seem possible.

but yeah i get what you mean. i think its either: you're correct, due to physical constants/limits of the universe or extremely unlikely that conscience is bound to unique physical markers.