Necessary Truths In Fiction

There is a simple but deep reason why scientific inaccuracies can be portrayed or otherwise integrated into fiction but logical impossibilities cannot: the former is a happenstance, contingent thing that even in everyday life could have been different than it is (in any logically possible way), while the latter contradicts logical axioms and thus cannot be true even in fictional stories.  Necessary truths such as how something that follows from another cannot be false or how it is impossible for there to be nothing that is true (then this would be true, making it true in itself by default) could not have been different or cannot be altered no matter how God, humanity, the natural world, or any other thing that does or could exist behaves.

It could have been the case or could become the case that we perceive fire to exude freezing effects on objects, for example.  It could have been true that when I see electrical phenomena, I would see the result of protons, rather than electrons, producing lightning-like manifestations that are often green in color instead of bluish.  Entire animals could have not existed (at least as far as perceptions suggest) and other creatures foreign to all of Earth's history could have inhabited the planet instead.  None of these things conflict with the inherent truths of logical axioms and other logical necessities, and thus they are possible; whatever is not true that is still possible could become or could have been true.

In any storytelling medium--video games, films, television shows, books, or even still images--these and legions of other logical possibilities are explored even if the storytellers do not understand these truths.  However, having characters or text incorrectly claim that a logical impossibility as opposed to an alternate scientific or historical possibility is true is the closest that fictional entertainment can come to this.  A character could say that nothing is absolutely certain, that God does not exist (at least as a basic uncaused cause), that time is an illusion, or that logic is not inherently true, among other things, and they could not be right even in fictional versions of reality.  A director or author could intend for their work to convey such an idea, though a logical necessity, as a necessary truth, is not escapable even in fiction.

If a character says time is going backwards, at most events are being reversed and they have made assumptions.  Time cannot go backwards.  One moment still leads to the next as a once-future moment becomes present and then slips into the past.  If a character makes the supremely asinine statement that nothing is true or nothing is truly knowable, moreover, logical axioms remain both things intrinsically.  The character or creator of the story must rely on reason to assert these contradictions because reason is still true in itself.  Because it is true by necessity and self-evident, reason cannot be false or anything short of intrinsic, universal, and all-dictating in even the most scientifically foreign stories.  What cannot be untrue cannot be rendered so even in the most bizarre products of storytelling.