₦airaland Forum

chaircover:
I am sorry to say that your husband has no respect for you or the vows he made just 3 months ago. Not Being Intimate for one months because one wife is pregnant is not enough reason to have an affair and It wouldn’t surprise me that if has been cheating on you long before the ring went on the finger & you missed the warning signs.

What can you do? Well nothing apart from focussing on your pregnancy. The last thing you want is a miscarriage due to stress. You also want to protect yourself from STD’s that your husband may get from these girls.

From what you describe, your husband seems rather deep in his extra marital affairs and it will take the Grace of God to get him out of this; I mean most men will make the effort to hide and shield their wives from knowing what they get up to but in this case he is blatantly rubbing it in your face.

Sometimes when courtships last too long and the couple are already living like man and wife, when the ring does officially go on the finger, there is not much to look forward to but that is no excuse or reason for this bad and disrespectful behaviour. I really feel for you & I hope that things get better for you. What you need right now is to be pampered and at peace and not have to go through this unnecessary stress.

OMG, where have you been? One of the most sensible posters I have seen on here. I am a fan.

Anyways, to the bolded this is exactly what I have been telling people. Why spend more than 5yr courting or another 5yrs after getting engaged? Why move in and have a child? After marriage there is nothing else to look forward to.

This photo is a bit too manly reminds me of k'naan. Isn't there a more feminine photo?

chaircover:
Many many of these abusers show their true colours very quickly in the relationship; a sarcastic comment here and there, forbidding you to see your friends, infidelity, a rougher than normal grab of the arm when he is angry etc but many women choose to ignore these warning signs, and try to be the martyr that will change him.

You are absolutely right.

I will dream of the maneuvers I am going to use to demolish your teeth when I come back. .Goodnight

lmaooooooo, omg I will surely deal with you later im off to sleep

Mek e lane quick oo if e stil want di  teeth dem na im mot. .

OAM4J:
Who tell you say i wan come Gambia sef? I will only send $100 and ask them to pack as many women the money can get inside plane for me.

lool, I think I am the one who will end up sending those teeth in your mouth back to naija

OAM4J, which kine disrespect be this sef?   I really would like to see you  with your toothless mouth in Gambia after you make that offer

You dey crace? You still goin by that d4 35 muki said? Go there and tell the woman thats how much you will pay and see if you will not see your teeth back in nigeria

@OAM4J, I will have to refuse your offer because I like fresh non spoilt men like olives

@muki, yu sef wait nor, gi yam 3days e go kam meet yu wit di kola

OAM4J:
kandiikane

I understand your bride price is not that costly. Can i send it by wire transfer and ask that you be put in the next available flight for me?

my bride price is 1.4million naira. .


@muki, it is still on the way, the man is walking his way to your family in sierra leone

^^You dey crace abi? Don't you know kola nuts has been sent to her family?

Ok, but scientifically speaking love in itself has nothing to do with religion

@Donchelsea, sorry but I do agree with jadoreD on your issue because you have come on here seen what they said about titi been beaten all the time and killed and you are still saying your man apologises after giving you a serious beating so is that why you should stay? To await another beating? Women don't learn at all, as you have seen if you are awaiting your death stay and let your husband beat you mercilessly.

african1:
Well maybe for you it doesn't, but for a lot of people it does. I know a lot of people who make their partner's religions believes their number one priority. They wont talk to someone who isn't what they want, and I don't think you can fall in love with a stranger that you never really talked to.

Neither do you fall in love because of someones religion unless you are talking about arranged marriages where they try to pretend to fall in love for the rest of their lives Amen.

THE FALLACY OF DISPLACEMENT CURRENT

Conventional electromagnetic theory proposes that when an electric current flows down
a wire into a capacitor it spreads out across the plate, producing an electric charge on the plate
which in turn leads to an electric field between the capacitor plates. The valuable concept of
continuity is then retained by postulating ``after Maxwell'' a displacement current. This current
is a manipulation of the electric field (E) between the capacitor plates which has the dimensions
of electric current and completes the flow of electricity in the circuit. This approach permits us
to retain Kirchoff's laws and other valuable concepts even though superficially it appears that at
the capacitor there is a break in the continuous flow of electric current. The flaw in this model
appears when we notice that the current entered the capacitor at only one point on the capacitor
plate. We then are left with the major difficulty of explaining how the electric charge flowing
down the wire suddenly distributes itself uniformly across the entire capacitor plate, at a velocity
in excess of the speed of light. This paradoxical situation is created by a flaw in the basic
model. Work in high speed logic conducted by Ivor Catt has shown that the model of lumped
capacitance is faulty and displacement current is an artifact of the faulty model. Since any
capacitor behaves similarly to a transmission line it is no more necessary to postulate a
displacement current for the capacitor than it is necessary to do so for a transmission line. The
excision of ``displacement current'' from electromagnetic theory has been based on arguments
which are independent of the classic dispute over whether the electric current causes the
electromagnetic field, or vice versa.

Thanks, but why can't I modify it?

ELECTROMAGNETIC ENERGY

The rate of flow of energy through a surface can be calculated as a function of E and H.
Specifically this flow is equivalent to E.H per unit area. This energy flows at the speed of light
through a medium where[img]http://jnaudin.free.fr/vta/p2.gif[/img] . E and H are in quadrature and are normal to the direction
of the energy flow. The energy density is therefore:: E.H/c. If two signals of equal magnitude
(assume E/2 & H/2) are travelling through each other in opposite directions the energy density
is calculated as follows:
[img]http://jnaudin.free.fr/vta/p12.gif[/img]
f the directions of the two signals are such that opposite H-fields cancel and E-fields add, an
apparently steady E-field will be created. The energy density of the fields remain as calculated
above, but the value of the E-field will double from E/2 to E. It is a simple matter using the
equations [img]http://jnaudin.free.fr/vta/p13.gif[/img][img]http://jnaudin.free.fr/vta/p2.gif[/img] for a team wave to get rid of H and c and so convert the
first equation into the well known equation for energy density in the so-called electrostatic field: [img]http://jnaudin.free.fr/vta/p14.gif[/img]
Similarly, if two signals flow through each other in such a way as to give the appearance of a
steady magnetic field as a result of their E-field canceling it is easily shown using the above
equations to cancel out H and c so that: [img]http://jnaudin.free.fr/vta/p15.gif[/img]

Modern physics is based upon the faulty assumption that electromagnetics contains two
kinds of energy: electric and magnetic. This assumption leads to a Baroque view of physical
reality. Under that view energy seems to be associated with the square of the field intensity
rather than a more reasonable view that it is linearly proportional to field intensity. It is worth
remembering that neither Einstein nor most modern physicists were or are familiar with the
concept of energy currents described herein. However, their work still survives by ignoring the
energy current concept, scalar electromagnetics, the works of T. E. Bearden, Kaluza-Klein, and
other who dispute Heaviside's interpretations of Maxwell's equations.

The image on this post is for the post above in regards to the perimeters of A/B=Aspect Ratio

GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF ENERGY TRANSFER

Consider energy, flowing straight and level down the proximity of a transmission line.
The energy does not know the width of the channel through which it is passing. If the energy
reaches a point where the dielectric changes (but not the geometry), some of it will continue on
and some of it will reflect. If the energy reaches a change in the width of the transmission line
some will reflect and some will continue as well. The energy current will not know whether:
(a) the dielectric is changing, or
(b) the geometry is changing
Energy current does not have directional inertia, so that (a) is equivalent to (b). Energy
current does have an aspect ratio. If the aspect ratio is forced to change, some of the flowing
energy will reflect in order to assure that its total aspect ratio remains constant. Crudely, the
aspect ratio is similar to the ratio of E to H, or the same as the ratio of to µ. The
aspect ratio of energy current is much like the aspect ratio of space. While the aspect ratio of
space can change, it fundamental velocity cannot really change. This parameter
becomes merely our way of conceptualizing time delay when energy resides in a region of space.

A /B = Aspect Ratio
Uniform space has only two parameters:

1) aspect ratio
2) time delay
Aspect ratio defines the shape of energy entering a given region of space, but not its
amplitude. Velocity or length define the time during which the properly shaped energy can be
accommodated by a region of space. Aspect ratio is really a definition of the relative
compatibility of adjacent regions of space. Does flowing energy current largely travel unimpeded
through an interface, or does it largely reflect at the interface? Space has quiet zones through
which energy glides virtually unreflected. There are also noisy zones where energy current
becomes incoherent, bounces about and splits apart. Noisy zones in space have either rapidly
changing geometry or rapidly changing impedance ().

Thats the thing though with modern science especially with the bigbang they don't think things happen on there own but something which caused it to happen.

Do you know why I cannot modify the thread I just made? Its called Nothing is something. I posted three times and now I cannot modify. Gives me a msg saying I cannot modify or its locked.

THE NATURE OF SPACE

Space itself is the ability to accommodate energy. Consider for a moment the following
illustration:
A signal (energy) is transmitted from point A to point B. A and B are separated by a
finite distance. Consider three periods of time:
1) The signal is launched from A.
2) The signal resides in the space between A and B.
3) The signal arrives at B.
If (3) occurs simultaneously with (1) we say that the signal has traveled at infinite
velocity. The signal has never resided in the intervening space and therefore there exists
no space between A and B. A is virtually at the same point in space as B. For real
space to exist between A and B it is necessary that a signal travelling between them be
"lost" with reference to both points for a finite period of time.

Now we know that for real space to exist between two points a signal travelling between
them will propagate at a finite velocity . If a signal will not travel between two
points, as in the case when c=0, then we can also conclude that there is no link or intervening
space between them. We have no means of detecting either an infinite velocity-supporting space
or zero-velocity space, so they do not exist as usable scientific concepts. If space cannot
accommodate a signal it has no function and no reality. We are left then with the only real
space, the home of the real and virtual vacuum. Space which supports a finite, nonzero velocity
where .

The above discussion dealt with a definition of space and the propagation velocity it will
support. A similar argument applies to the impedance of space. A medium can only
accommodate positive energy if the medium resists it to a reasonable degree. Neither an
infinitely strong spring nor an infinitely weak one can absorb or accommodate energy by being
compressed. Neither an infinitely large mass nor an infinitely light mass can absorb or
accommodate energy imparted by collision. The same holds true for space. Energy cannot enter
space of zero impedance (i.e; ) any more than a force can bear on a mass of zero
magnitude. Similarly, energy could not enter space of infinite impedance. It follows therefore,
that necessary properties of real space are:
1) finite propagation velocity
2) finite impedance.
Continuing our discussion of space and the values of c, Zo, µ, we take as given
that real space sustains non-zero finite impedance and velocity as follows:

where: µ and are characteristics of a unit volume
As yet we have not arrived at volume, which implies real space. At this point in our
discussion we have merely described c and Zo . Therefore, we can only define µ and in terms
of them. Algebraically it can be shown that:

Although we have said that the fundamental characteristics of space are c and Zo , perhaps
it is better to say that they are t and Zo , where t is the time delay through a finite segment of
space replacing c, the velocity through that segment. It is profitable to move away from the idea
of constant velocity c travelling through space which leads one to conceptualization of a segment
of space which traversed in 1 nanosecond (nsec) is 1 foot long. If one starts with a conceptual
frame in which space is in terms of t, a segment of space can easily be though of as 1 nsec wide,
and the energy entering it appears leaving it 1 nsec later. Subsidiary concepts of length and
velocity can then be deduced as needed. We could alternately say that space was (a) 1 foot wide
with a propagation velocity of 1 foot/nsec, or (b) 2 feet wide with a velocity of 2 feet/nsec.
Fundamental to the proposed world view is the reality that no experiment could help us decide
between (a) and (b). The essence of space is time, not distance, and only one propagation
velocity () is possible through a segment of space. Thus, time through a segment is
intimately related to the length of the segment. Propagation which is not at the speed of light
cannot exist according to this world view.