Hey /sci/ is the universe logical?

It's as logical as /sci/, op.

>>8103222
Nice trips

no it is probalistic

>>8103385
>probability doesn't follow logic

>>8103391
what if there is finite probability of a system behaving illogically? BTFO

what else is it supposed to be? emotional?

>>8103395
>implying illogical is not logical in a different logical framework

>>8103216
No, but logic is universal

>>8103405
how is logic universal if the universe is not logical. or did u just try to make a clever wordplay that is actually retarded

>>8103216
Guys please respond

>>8103406
>u·ni·ver·sal
>/ˌyo͞onəˈvərsəl/Submit
>adjective
>1. of, affecting, or done by all people or things in the world or in a particular group; applicable to all cases.
"Universal" does not necessarily relate to the universe.

File: 1452688627740.jpg (92KB, 540x589px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 540x589px

>>8103216
> Quantum Field Theory says to predict the future
> all contingencies contribute to the result
> thus somewhere in the grand equation predicting all creation
> there is a "radioactive unicorns flying out of your butt" term

I don't know OP, you tell me.

>>8103403

holy fuck, chuckled, thanks man

If it is you'd know

>>8104396

Or would you? "Common sense" logic is largely something you acquire from your environment and experience. Basically what >>8103403

>>8103216
Logic is just a mathematically formalized language that spits out truth values, and there is more than one system of it. You're question makes about as much sense as "Is the universe English or french?"

I'll give you some relevant food for thought though. Any property that has content is incompatible with some other property. Objective properties, and so the facts concerning which objects exhibit which properties, stand in relations of material incompatibility and consequence. Natural science, paradigmatically Newton’s physics, has objective properties and facts as standing to one another in lawful relations of exclusion and consequence. That two bodies subject to no other forces collide is materially (non-logically, rather, because of laws of nature) incompatible with their accelerations not changing. That the acceleration of a massive object is changed has as a material consequence (lawfully necessitates) that a force has been applied to it. In the first case, the two ways the world could be do not just contrast with one another (differ). It is impossible—so Newtonian physics, not logic, tells us, hence physically impossible—that both should be facts. And in the second case it is physically necessary—a matter of the laws of physics—that if a fact of the first kind were to obtain, so would a fact of the second kind.

It follows that if by “logical” we mean, “standing in relations of material incompatibility and consequence,” then the objective facts and properties natural science reveals to as physical reality are themselves in logical shape. Modal realism, the claim that some states of affairs necessitate others and make others impossible, the acknowledgment of laws of nature, entails logical realism: the claim that the way the world objectively is is logically articulated.
>>8103385
There is a such thing as probabilistic logic

>>8104396
ebin

>>8103216
no