This is Treb Posting on "Anti-Matter"

Let me say first nature does not create in pairs for no reason. That
means now that we know about antimatter going back to Dirac(my
ideal) Dirac also predicted electrons must have spin. "Thus my spin
is in theory gets Dirac"s nod." WELL I live in the positron
antiuniverse,and that tells you antiuniverses do exist and where all
the antiparticles of the big bang ended up.Yes Bert is right handed
and I am left handed Worse part is I am positive and he is negative.
We have a time laps that seperates us. How much time is the kicker. At
the very beginning we were so very close but that was 22 billion years
ago and we have to take in space inflating. Now being Bert's twin I
have to think out of the box,and predict man will create electrons,and
all sub-micropartices to spin in the direction he wants. So if two
universes merged they would not destroy each other. Bert and I could
shake hands. Well I am giving Bert 6 lotto # and he has to play them
over and over. When time they come out will tell us our time laps,and
that to us is more important than money. O ya TreB

On Nov 16, 7:21*pm, Saul Levy wrote:
Talking to yourself, BEERTbrainIDIOT?

YEP!

NOT GOOD!

Saul Levy

On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:25:38 -0800 (PST), bert



wrote:
Let me say first nature does not create in pairs for no reason. That
means now that we know about antimatter going back to Dirac(my
ideal) * Dirac also predicted electrons must have spin. "Thus my spin
is in theory gets Dirac"s nod." WELL I live in the positron
antiuniverse,and that tells you antiuniverses do exist and where all
the antiparticles of the big bang ended up.Yes Bert is right handed
and I am left handed Worse part is I am positive and he is negative.
We have a time laps that seperates us. How much time is the kicker. At
the very beginning we were so very close but that was 22 billion years
ago and we have to take in space inflating. *Now being Bert's twin I
have to think out of the box,and predict man will create electrons,and
all sub-micropartices to spin in the direction he wants. *So if two
universes merged they would not destroy each other. Bert and I could
shake hands. * Well I am giving Bert 6 lotto # and he has to play them
over and over. When time they come out will tell us our time laps,and
that to us is more important than money. *O ya * TreB- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Reality is when Bert and I are thinking together we are two of the
worlds greatest thinkers. Two heads are better than one. Bert and I
are mother nature greatest balancing act. "You can't have one without
the other" BerTreb

On Nov 17, 7:58*am, bert wrote:
On Nov 16, 7:21*pm, Saul Levy wrote:





Talking to yourself, BEERTbrainIDIOT?

YEP!

NOT GOOD!

Saul Levy

On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:25:38 -0800 (PST), bert

wrote:
Let me say first nature does not create in pairs for no reason. That
means now that we know about antimatter going back to Dirac(my
ideal) * Dirac also predicted electrons must have spin. "Thus my spin
is in theory gets Dirac"s nod." WELL I live in the positron
antiuniverse,and that tells you antiuniverses do exist and where all
the antiparticles of the big bang ended up.Yes Bert is right handed
and I am left handed Worse part is I am positive and he is negative.
We have a time laps that seperates us. How much time is the kicker. At
the very beginning we were so very close but that was 22 billion years
ago and we have to take in space inflating. *Now being Bert's twin I
have to think out of the box,and predict man will create electrons,and
all sub-micropartices to spin in the direction he wants. *So if two
universes merged they would not destroy each other. Bert and I could
shake hands. * Well I am giving Bert 6 lotto # and he has to play them
over and over. When time they come out will tell us our time laps,and
that to us is more important than money. *O ya * TreB- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Reality is when Bert and I are thinking together we are two of the
worlds greatest thinkers. Two heads are better than one. Bert and I
are mother nature greatest balancing act. "You *can't have one without
the other" * * BerTreb- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Bert and I are two sides to the same coin. We are back to back,and can
see "coming and going." We see in both directions. I'm heads up and
Bert is tails down. We disagree on that,but get along rather well.
Bert gave me Hmmm numbers for the lotto. That's a kicker since I'm
older. Bertreb

On Nov 19, 8:09*am, bert wrote:
On Nov 17, 7:58*am, bert wrote:





On Nov 16, 7:21*pm, Saul Levy wrote:

Talking to yourself, BEERTbrainIDIOT?

YEP!

NOT GOOD!

Saul Levy

On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:25:38 -0800 (PST), bert

wrote:
Let me say first nature does not create in pairs for no reason. That
means now that we know about antimatter going back to Dirac(my
ideal) * Dirac also predicted electrons must have spin. "Thus my spin
is in theory gets Dirac"s nod." WELL I live in the positron
antiuniverse,and that tells you antiuniverses do exist and where all
the antiparticles of the big bang ended up.Yes Bert is right handed
and I am left handed Worse part is I am positive and he is negative.
We have a time laps that seperates us. How much time is the kicker. At
the very beginning we were so very close but that was 22 billion years
ago and we have to take in space inflating. *Now being Bert's twin I
have to think out of the box,and predict man will create electrons,and
all sub-micropartices to spin in the direction he wants. *So if two
universes merged they would not destroy each other. Bert and I could
shake hands. * Well I am giving Bert 6 lotto # and he has to play them
over and over. When time they come out will tell us our time laps,and
that to us is more important than money. *O ya * TreB- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Reality is when Bert and I are thinking together we are two of the
worlds greatest thinkers. Two heads are better than one. Bert and I
are mother nature greatest balancing act. "You *can't have one without
the other" * * BerTreb- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Bert and I are two sides to the same coin. We are back to back,and can
see "coming and going." *We see in both directions. I'm heads up and
Bert is tails down. We disagree on that,but get along rather well.
Bert gave me Hmmm *numbers for the lotto. That's a kicker since I'm
older. * Bertreb- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Here is a thought We can produce anti-matter and when it hits ordinary
matter it is writen its 100% energy in the form of an explosion. Hmmm
I say no. Out of that energy comes trillions of neutrinos and they
just about go right through matter like its the aether. TreBert

"bert" wrote in message
...

Bert and I are two sides to the same coin. We are back to back,and can
see "coming and going." We see in both directions. I'm heads up and
Bert is tails down.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So.......YOU are the top and Bert is the bottom?

YOU are the butch and Bert is the bitch?

On Nov 20, 6:57*am, "B-Hate-Me" wrote:
"bert" wrote in message

...

Bert and I are two sides to the same coin. We are back to back,and can
see "coming and going." *We see in both directions. I'm heads up and
Bert is tails down.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So.......YOU are the top and Bert is the bottom?

* * * * * * YOU are the butch and Bert is the bitch?

Ha Ha Ha You make Bert and I like HVAC & Hagar. That is far out
thinking. We are straight,and to prove it will vote for Palin in 2012.
TreBert

On Nov 19, 1:19*pm, Saul Levy wrote:
Since WHEN can we produce ANTI-MATTER, BEERTbrainIDIOT?

BULL****!

YOU ARE VERY SENILE!

Saul Levy

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 05:30:54 -0800 (PST), bert



wrote:
Here is a thought We can produce anti-matter and when it hits ordinary
matter it is writen its 100% energy in the form of an explosion. Hmmm
I say no. *Out of that energy comes trillions of neutrinos and they
just about go right through matter like its the aether. TreBert- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Levy if only you had a brain you could learn a lot from my posts.
Antimater has opposite electric charge and opposite nuclea force
charges.(please think on that) First anti-matter particle discovered
was the positron. In around 1950s at U of C at Berkeley its
accelerator(Bevatron produced the first antiproton.(negative charge)
Cern and Fermi accelerators have created antihydrogenWOW Here is a
kicker "Antimater is the most costly stuff. I will do again a What
if on antimatter since I think about it often TreBert

On Nov 16, 3:25*pm, bert wrote:
Let me say first nature does not create in pairs for no reason. That
means now that we know about antimatter going back to Dirac(my
ideal) * Dirac also predicted electrons must have spin. "Thus my spin
is in theory gets Dirac"s nod." WELL I live in the positron
antiuniverse,and that tells you antiuniverses do exist and where all
the antiparticles of the big bang ended up.Yes Bert is right handed
and I am left handed Worse part is I am positive and he is negative.
We have a time laps that seperates us. How much time is the kicker. At
the very beginning we were so very close but that was 22 billion years
ago and we have to take in space inflating. *Now being Bert's twin I
have to think out of the box,and predict man will create electrons,and
all sub-micropartices to spin in the direction he wants. *So if two
universes merged they would not destroy each other. Bert and I could
shake hands. * Well I am giving Bert 6 lotto # and he has to play them
over and over. When time they come out will tell us our time laps,and
that to us is more important than money. *O ya * TreB

Merging universes should not be much different than merging galaxies,
like what happened to form the Milky Way that's made of two or more
galaxies plus lots of molecular/nebula stuff picked up along the way.

However, if each galaxy is contained within its own event horizon is
where there could be some considerable interaction, like electrostatic
charged party balloons sticking to one another or otherwise attacking
one another because of polarity differences. There's still no good
reason to think of another universe as antimatter, although anything
is possible.

~ BG

On Nov 20, 8:51*am, Brad Guth wrote:
On Nov 16, 3:25*pm, bert wrote:





Let me say first nature does not create in pairs for no reason. That
means now that we know about antimatter going back to Dirac(my
ideal) * Dirac also predicted electrons must have spin. "Thus my spin
is in theory gets Dirac"s nod." WELL I live in the positron
antiuniverse,and that tells you antiuniverses do exist and where all
the antiparticles of the big bang ended up.Yes Bert is right handed
and I am left handed Worse part is I am positive and he is negative.
We have a time laps that seperates us. How much time is the kicker. At
the very beginning we were so very close but that was 22 billion years
ago and we have to take in space inflating. *Now being Bert's twin I
have to think out of the box,and predict man will create electrons,and
all sub-micropartices to spin in the direction he wants. *So if two
universes merged they would not destroy each other. Bert and I could
shake hands. * Well I am giving Bert 6 lotto # and he has to play them
over and over. When time they come out will tell us our time laps,and
that to us is more important than money. *O ya * TreB

Merging universes should not be much different than merging galaxies,
like what happened to form the Milky Way that's made of two or more
galaxies plus lots of molecular/nebula stuff picked up along the way.

However, if each galaxy is contained within its own event horizon is
where there could be some considerable interaction, like electrostatic
charged party balloons sticking to one another or otherwise attacking
one another because of polarity differences. *There's still no good
reason to think of another universe as antimatter, although anything
is possible.

*~ BG- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My two universes created out of BB goes back to 1946. Universes are
produced no different than particle pairs. Its all part of natures
balancing acts. Without these balancing acts there can not be any
universes in the cosmos. That is the reason I have my convex space
curve. It balances out Einstein's concave space curve. That is Nobel
thinking TreBert

On Nov 20, 6:06*am, bert wrote:
On Nov 20, 8:51*am, Brad Guth wrote:



On Nov 16, 3:25*pm, bert wrote:

Let me say first nature does not create in pairs for no reason. That
means now that we know about antimatter going back to Dirac(my
ideal) * Dirac also predicted electrons must have spin. "Thus my spin
is in theory gets Dirac"s nod." WELL I live in the positron
antiuniverse,and that tells you antiuniverses do exist and where all
the antiparticles of the big bang ended up.Yes Bert is right handed
and I am left handed Worse part is I am positive and he is negative.
We have a time laps that seperates us. How much time is the kicker. At
the very beginning we were so very close but that was 22 billion years
ago and we have to take in space inflating. *Now being Bert's twin I
have to think out of the box,and predict man will create electrons,and
all sub-micropartices to spin in the direction he wants. *So if two
universes merged they would not destroy each other. Bert and I could
shake hands. * Well I am giving Bert 6 lotto # and he has to play them
over and over. When time they come out will tell us our time laps,and
that to us is more important than money. *O ya * TreB

Merging universes should not be much different than merging galaxies,
like what happened to form the Milky Way that's made of two or more
galaxies plus lots of molecular/nebula stuff picked up along the way.

However, if each galaxy is contained within its own event horizon is
where there could be some considerable interaction, like electrostatic
charged party balloons sticking to one another or otherwise attacking
one another because of polarity differences. *There's still no good
reason to think of another universe as antimatter, although anything
is possible.

*~ BG- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My two universes created out of BB goes back to 1946. Universes are
produced no different than particle pairs. Its all part of natures
balancing acts. Without these balancing acts there can not be any
universes in the cosmos. *That is the reason I have my convex space
curve. It balances out Einstein's concave space curve. *That is Nobel
thinking * TreBert

Yes it is Nobel worthy, and likely rabbi Saul Levy or some other born-
again faith will either take all the credit or at least see that you
never get any credit, because it's what they do best.

I agree, there has to be at least two universes.

~ BG