The rejection of null hypothesis will be valid only if this is true: If the probability of the obtained result given that an assumption is true is very low, then the probability that the assumption is true is very low.
But I have seen no logical justification for this fact.
(Note that saying that the p-value shows the likelihood of the null hypothesis being right is a fallacy. (Link) P value doesn't deal with probability of the assumption at all.)
I have seen justifications based on intuition such as: we intuitively reject the assumption that the experiment is random, if we obtain 100 heads in 100 coin tosses. But this doesn't logically show that the assumption being true is a low probability case (which it should in order to come to the conclusion).
So what is the logical justification for that?