If Universe=∃（Being） could be defined, next phrase must be outputted.

Nothing=Nothing(changing)
Notice; Changing must never have a chance to be set as final form as absolute Certainty, it means Being’s (∃’s)determined being must never be imposslbe. It’s Beings Uncetainty’s formula.

But, Nothing=Nothing means nothing, it’s impossble in a degree of definition, at the rate of existing situation, Namely we are actually present, we can only tell everything only in presence, existing matters as ours, thus this formula is impossible in the situation Complete Nothing=Absolute Nothing.

If we admit all things beforehand, I told, present situation as Being=Exisitence is anytime consistently in changing, one certain meant absolute completion must never be possible.

Thus,
Presence as Exitence=Nothing
Note; At this rate, Nothing must mean what completed or perfectional Being must never be possible to be present.

0＝0
It’s not actual, only in our cognition, it must be present only expediently for the present.

However,
1＝1
It is just right at a rate of our Being’s fact.
But simltaneusly it must be vanished according to the time Universe distinguished (of course, our human-beings was to be vanished before it was vanished, as the probability means to us, so high potentially.)
Thus, if we recognize its thing, so metaphisicallty,

1＝1＝Not1(Nothing)（No(1)）

Could be set.
Simpler summarized,
1＝1＝Changing meant either the fact of any change= All the ones who are present as Beings must be only in Mortality as they must be vanished.

In other words,
1＝1→0

Nothing must be set except its formula.

If our Universe and its disappearance means the fact with a background as Nothing, our Universe means

0（1）0

As if we can define so, Being(∃)=Universe must be surrounded by the Absolute Fact as Never be Never be as nothing, necessarily.
However, it means actually, Nothing means irrelevance, but it must be only supposed as it would be possible.

0┃1
In conclusion, Being must be severed, or shredded so completely to Non-Existence=Nothing.
Thereby, only we could understand its perfect separation, we can grasp it.

Otherwise, simultanesly a vision to the world which is our own thing including Nothing and Existence could be deducted to the next　

Namely, 0┃1 would be possible, God must be absent, never present.

Because just as the formula 0┃1, we can call God as the thing can make Nothing Existence.

In other words, if 0┃1 would be verified by us, Nothing and Being as Exisitence must be irrelevant as Non-related, or Never being in relation to each other, moreover if we could know it, we must never need God.
Rather, what we’d created must be God.

However, if its stance or an idea must be irrelevance at a degee that Jean Calvin said in Christianae Religionis Institutio and moreover never so faithful to Christianity, after all conclusively only God must be absolute, the domain even God must never enter in must be needed.

But as if Hitoshi Nagai emphasised that God must never be in a position of any individual. And if it was so reasonable, we must be obliged to re-define another God as restricted powered as partially universal or almighty, so actually.

But in other words, we could explicate it the next.

Contemporary physics are so, for example Theory of Kobayashi-Masukawa as CP-Violation in the Renormalizable Theory of Weak Interaction would be a typical example, the matter I explained previously that Exisitence as Being as it is 1 and Nothing=0 as it is so irrelevant to it would be obviously, even if Universe as Being by itself popped up to be in a reality, otherwise, it was made by God, paraphrasing it as intransitive verb or transitive verb both would be okay, rather in Nothing, some elements which could invoke the Existence must be possible to be present.

In conclusion, so rare collapse of Nothing itself must have had popped up at our Universe, and it was given birth to, that possibility must be possible theorically, its so representative example is so called Kobayashi-Masukara theory.

Thus,
0┃1
Is our understandable application of God eye-line.

After all, we unconsciously with its definitive cognition, we are apt to imagine God’s observatory view, by ourselves, we are pretending to be God and grasp Nothing so usually.

And if 0┃1 must be pararelled to each other, and they must never be crossed, it means so differentiated to share, mutual erosion, nor necessarily either to symbiosis, we suppose so as if to be beyond God, already we’ve done so, even that Calvin was the same.

And for going beyond the God’s privilege, we create God as the absolute either.
Of course, as if God has had created us would be applied to our absolute premise.

If those supposion was false and actually completely from Nothing, Existence as Being was born,

0→1→0
Would be proper, and Existence as Being must be vanished to Nothing, and if afterward, never again that kind of advent must never be impossoble, of course, we for the time being, could never evidence, I feel so, it must be once in His capriciousness.

However, originally if Existence as Being must be irrelevant to Nothing, still now, only in a form that it must be impossible to be present, Nothing must be present.

In conclusion, simply, only
0┃1
Could be allowed so enough properly.

〇Originally, for all individual, any being must never had been present before each birth, previous present situation as Existence as Being before each was born must never be set.
All started only with each individual birth.
As if Wittgenstein says, 〘We can never stand at the outside of World as Myself〙.
〘We can never stand at the language〙as his idea necessarily Myself as it means in narrowed meaning, we each could never become any other one as it is the most important theory of Hitoshi Nagai’s philosophy, both can be accorded,so completely.

And more so important the most,
〘We can never stand at outside of each myself〙＝〘We could never stand at outside of language〙in no waver,

〘We could nenver stand at Existence=Being〙
All are so meaningless except it.

(May.7th. 2019)
(to be continued)