/lit/ - Literature

>>17301762
>Does Logic still apply outside of our universe?
How would we know?

>>17301762
Space is a feature of the universe and 'outside' is a descriptor of space.

Logic is a tool we use. Read about epistemology if you're interested in the contradictions inherent in logic.

>"outside" the universe

Nonsensical.

>>17301805
Space is finite, or so some physicist say. Now, if I travel to the edge of space with a tied up logician and push him over the edge ... can he survive?

>>17301820
You're still operating in the realm of space.

>>17301805
>>17301787
>>17301829
found the brainlets

>>17301820
Nobody knows fag

>>17301829
So ... the universe is not finite is what you are saying? Cause if it's finite, there would be no space beyond the edge, or would there?

Outside the universe even the concept of nothingness doesn’t exist. There is no energy and no mass, and there isn’t a lack of energy or mass either. There is no measurable distance or time, no minimums or maximums, no frames of reference. What lies beyond the universe is something we don’t have a means to describe or conceive.

>>17301971
Yes, but does logic transcend the universe? That is the real question. Logic is both nothing and something that I could only describe as metaphysical.

>>17301787
>>17301805
>>17301829
Found the retards who don't watch vsauce.

>>17301820
you cant push him outside because there is nowhere to go, he wont hit a wall either obviously, think of it as walking in place

>>17302057
I would say no because our understanding is rooted in the physical universe. Even the most abstract of concepts reference something tied to this realm.

>>17302131
How many other "abstract "concepts, other than logic, would you agree that transcend humans?

>>17302100
That's actually a very interesting concept.

Since it has been proven that the universe is expanding at a speed greater than the speed of light, there is no future for anything to travel outside of the universe. The same concept that applies when you cross the event horizon of a black hole. All the possible futures converge into you falling into it.

>>17301820
You would never reach the edge of space, it is always expanding, the rate of expansion is always accelerating, and the rate of acceleration is always accelerating. Even if you could teleport to the edge of the universe, it would move millions of light years away in less than an instant.

>>17302153
>That's actually a very interesting concept.
thanks I came up with it myself

>>17302165
Damn, that's fast.

>>17301762
Im sure other dimensions or galaxies have different laws of physics etc. So logic can be different too. Since it applies to reality you live in.

>>17301762
Yes, whatever caused our universe caused logic. It'd just be more complex as there's a degradation of existence which accounts for differences among qm and gr

>>17303422
Galaxies no but dimensions yes and no. There's a single governing logic but it has to account for degradation and negation completeness

>>17303422
Without logic, cohesion ceases to exist.

>>17301762
You have no idea what you mean by "outside our universe," you've simply jumbled together words in the form of a question. Why do you even care about this "question" in the first place? You don't even know yourself what you are referring to when you say "universe," how would you expect us to help you?

>>17302057
Logic is made-up, so no it doesn’t exist there. Numbers don’t exist in nature, we project the numbers onto nature. Not being a dick but if you disagree then read philosophy

>>17302165
But what if you were accelerating at the same rate as the expansion of the universe? Assuming, of course, that your initial position was at the edge of the universe.

>>17304471
>reading comprehension

>>17304486
Math derives from logic. So you're not being coherent here.

You just made two oopsies

>are there any books that explore unknowable speculative nonsense subject?

logic is applicable only to alternate universes, perfect representations and versions which adhere to our limited logical systems, and these rules never apply to our our own in actuality, only in practice but never in spirit.

>>17301774
fpbp

>>17301762
Our material universe? Yes, but as universe as interchangeable with "world," that is every defining thing here, then it's just impossible to know.

>>17304486
you're a fucking idiot

>>17304486
>Logic is made-up

>>17305070
you have no idea how much further you have yet to climb, dregling

doesn't even apply outside your head
curb your anglo

>>17305873
I accept your defeat.

>>17305952
larping

idk what I'm talking about, just to preface.

let's take the intuitionist perspective - propositions have truth values only if that proposition is constructively proven (that is, given a set of axioms and rules of logical inference, the proposition can be "reached" by applying the rules of logical inference in a finite number of steps).

well, that's a computational process. so "truth" depends on our ability to carry out this procedure. But there are limits to computation (Bremermann's limit). Which means you can imagine in a universe that occupies small enough spacetime volume will be unable to establish particular truth values. In this universe, given my previous assumptions, particular truth values can never be established, and are hence untrue.

In that sense, particular logical systems may be said to have different results in different universes.