Logic cannot establish matters of fact. Logic requires facts to be "fed" into it to work, but logic itself cannot produce facts. So, if you want to know if the physical universe exists, you must rely on something other than logic.
(Most of us use sensation/experience.) Since logic relies on facts to work, those facts themselves cannot be based on logic to produce them. As I am understanding it, the question "Does the physical world exist?" is not a question of truth, but a question of fact. Logic can discover truths, but not facts.
(Facts are not discovered, just acknowledged.) However, that may not be what you're looking for. So, If I were to try to formulate an argument that physical reality exists, I think I would start with: "Does anything outside my mind exist?" I would then say: "Yes.
Other minds exist." "How do you know they exist?" "Because, formulating the idea that other minds do not exist requires the idea be expressed in words. And words are a tool for communicating between minds." From there I would ask what are common features think about the physical world, how much can minds confirm the experiences of other minds, etc. (Now, I don't think that's a great argument...but this is the problem.
Logic requires facts to function...so facts are antecedent to the use of logic.).
I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.