If there something won't end, first nothing could fall under. 
Because as long as being by itself could be there, everlastingly to it, not that nothing must never be none nor disappear. Necessarily our life must have death, to interpretable extent it must end. But it is not identical with originally none, far from it, first born and sometime die. 

From the beginning, only being must be into none as phenomenon, e.g. we will die in ending, though every alive phenomenon unexceptional. But strictly describable interpreting has another answer, because even dead body is materially present and even cremation derives our own body none into ash, but chemically it must not be disappearing, but chemical change was done, only so.

Nevertheless, as long as the ones whose mind can recognize everthing in discriminable mind, only nothing could never end, because only nothing can evade any ending, because originally it must have been none. Thus only nothing must never end, and ending identity must be present as being. At least at first stage, it must be present. 

And, very necessarily, as long as being could be present, ending as life or so as being by itself makes itself into nothing as a totalled form must never be none. Record of lifetime and the presence must be remained, left to society as a record. And chemical change from alive to dead is not identical with originally impossible to be none, necessarily. 

Necessarily, if any being as the presence by itself could be none, this time, even nothing could never end, because what makes ending as what ending could be cognitively known must need presence as the being signified "the presence". Originally none thing must never have ending. What has ending must be first birth or made state given is absolutely conditioned.

Meanwhile, really as long as we are alive and being as we are, that'd never be possible at being regenerated. Dead one must die, never return into alive. 

Because after all, nothing in cognitively known as the condition must need necessity of disappearance definition and its really embodied phenomenon. In general, it seems to be seen, but actually, it's different. Because originally none state must have no reason to be none as disappearance absence intrinsically. 

In other words, starting thing must sometime end, though being thing must disappear sometime, and nothing is originally none, though that substance must never have end nor must have none, though not disappearing nor not ending.

At next occasion, I'd like to equate those truths in simplifying necessity, that rationally treated form must be so advantageous around knowing ending counterpart concept verb starting, launching, beginning or so intrinsically. 

(Irregularly continued)

Aug. 25,  26th.   2023