text:
What caused you to start studying the church?
Last week, I was talking with someone, when he brought up the subject of the church. He had read some of my blog posts, and he asked me why I started studying the church.
I explained that I began questioning some of my own understanding of the church during a seminary class on the subject of worship. One of my assignments was to write an essay on worship. I decided to write an essay about the "worship service" from a scriptural perspective.
The more I studied the subject, the more difficult it became to write the essay. Eventually, I changed the topic of my essay, but I continued the study the "worship service." I quickly learned that what I had been taught (either through books, classes, preaching, or example) could not be backed up by Scripture.
This led me to study the church meeting from Scripture. I soon discovered that many (most?… all?) ecclesiology (and then theological) topics are intertwined. Thus, changing what I understood about the church meeting meant that I also needed to examine what I understood about communion (the Lord's Supper), church leadership, fellowship, spiritual gifts, etc.
But, as I begin to think back about the conversation with my friend last week, and other conversations that I had with other people during the last few years, I remembered that different people begin to examine their own understanding of the church for different reasons.
If you (currently or in the past) have questioned your understanding of the church, what caused (prompted) you to being that study in the first place? If you haven't questioned your understanding of the church, what convinces you that what you've been taught is valid?
(I'm not saying that my understanding of the church is valid; I'm simply interested in other people's thoughts on this.)
37 Comments
Comments are closed. If you would like to discuss this post, send an email to alan [at] alanknox [dot] net.
For me, it was secondary to learning about historical exegesis and theology. As a matter of curiosity, I picked up a copy of Lightfoot's translation of the Apostolic Fathers, fully convinced I would find people with my evangelical(including ecclesiological) convictions. What I found was something entirely different. I also began to ask questions like, "How did we get the Bible?" – can you imagine if Protestant Christianity had to now decide a canon? I began to find an ecclesiology that made sense in both Scripture and history.
I was recognized as an elder and entered into "the inner sanctum" of leadership of the evangelical denomination of which I was a part.
That was a shock to the system as I saw the same kind of pragmatism,subtle manipulation of people,lobbying and jobs for the boys, as one finds in politics. The church was their management project.Evangelism was the means of increasing the size and prestige of their corporate entity, nothing more.
I began questioning the pastor, with whom I was to function, and found that, he too had begun the same journey. Sadly, the pressures put upon him took his life.
There was a 2-year discipleship course I took at my local (institutional) church, and then decided to teach the course for another 2-years.
In the process of teaching I delve further into the study of what "church" means to discuss it with my brothers.
After the 4 years of the class (and 11 years total), I am now walking in the non-institutional wilderness and it has been the best decision ever.
I almost hate to admit it but it was the book Pagan Christianity by Frank Viola which we were curious about after reading Eric's review of it entitled "this book beat me up". That is what got the wheels to start turning for me. Thankfully, now I am more interested in how to live out the patterns and principles we find in scripture and not so focused on pagan influence in the church. With some experience in a participatory gathering as we try to follow those patterns and principles I have seen the Holy Spirit guide and build our assembly in such a way that I never want to go back to institutional forms as I'm becoming less and less oppositional to those forms.
I came to Christ while in the Navy early 1970. My first year of scriptural studies was pretty much on my own. It geared me up to line up what I saw with what I had studied. I still bought into the cultural stream of things because that's what there was. In the mid-eighties I saw a misuse of pastoral authority that lead a local "church" to crumble. That drove my wife and I into intensive studies on church leadership and church structure. I've come to find that even the most "spiritual" of churches are capable of lessening or even blocking out the headship of Christ in their organizations.
I began to question my previous ideas of church about 6 years ago, when I became interested in the emerging church movement. That led me to read a number of different authors who were looking at church from new points of view. At first, I was in favor of "worship evangelism" and trying to build a big "relevant" church. As i went deeper and deeper into church leadership, I began to see that the mega church model was not Scriptural, and saw so many things that the church had been doing for years that did nothing to produce disciples, just church workers.
As I've studied Scripture and continued to read good books and blogs, I've realized the importance of being in community with other believers, and ministering to each other, building each other up and equipping each other to go out and show God's love to others.
I'm now part of a small fellowship that meets in a bagel shop, has no paid staff, no "pastor" as such, and is committed to helping each other follow Jesus more closely.
Church unity (or lack thereof) got me started questioning the box I've grown up in. I went searching for common basic beliefs across denominational lines, and tried to see past the traditions and divisions that we had created.
Since I was questioning traditions, Pagan Christianity was suggested reading. It shook that box a bit more.
Thanks Alan for sharing your wisdom. Looking at Scripture on my own too, and being encouraged by others who are working out fresh new/ancient perspectives of how God's family can live together under His Lordship.
Wow it's amazing how God opens our hearts & eyes isn't it? I love hearing how He used His Word and your schooling in your life Alan.
All faith comes from hearing the Word… the more HE draws us into His Word – the more we are changed. His Words of Love & Acceptance to me is what started me on the walk with Him and falling in Love with Him again and desiring for His Church to do the same.
My spiritual mentor (my grandma) died May 13 2007… I found myself that day outside in my neighborhood – face on the concrete shattered – crying out in desperation to God that I wanted to truly KNOW Him. I wanted to know what it meant to feel His Love, Hear His voice.. I wanted to know Him like grandma did.. I would say I "met the HOly Spirit" that day and He drew me to His Word. I studied His Word on my own – and the more I studied – the more I was changed and realized so much of what I read I wasn't being taught. It wasn't being proclaimed. It bothered me. I did my first topical bible study and simply asked God to answer, "God, what pleases you?"…. although it was not an exhaustive study… He blew me away with the answers I found in the Bible. I found it wasn't any work I could contribute… it wasn't a self help process…. in fact nothing I was being taught lined up with what God was telling me pleased Him… it almost seemed to be working against what He was showing me… He was showing me that my faith was pleasing to Him. His Son was pleasing. My submission & trust in HIM to work was pleasing to Him. my Thanksgiving was pleasing (again – all about Him and His Work not anything I could offer)…
Point is… the more I studied… the more confused I was getting about the reality I was living in… I didn't understand why what I was reading and being taught directly from God – sooo mindboggling, life transforming, world changing wasn't being taught and lived out by 'leaders' around me.
I wasn't getting the same message…. shortly after — through an experience of "being called to help launch a church" … I realized the whole system was the very thing that made more of us and less of Jesus. Not pleasing to GOd at all. Whether intentional or not… I felt the organizations I was apart of… and everything it took in our own efforts to try to 'create' them were the very giants and idols we then were trying to teach people to slay….
soo then I met Alan online 🙂 and became even more fascinated with the study of The Church.
from Ephesians 5… God makes it clear. HE will Build His Church. *He* "will make her holy…will present her to himself as a radiant church without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless"
I desire so much to be apart of that Church that makes it as easy as possible for that work to happen without our own efforts getting in His way.
HE will build His Church.
Unity, yes a big one for sure. I served the church as a pastor for 20 years, including four as a church planter in the 1970s. My love and interest grew when I began to see the church all over the world in many forms and expressions. Then John 17 hit me like a ton of bricks. Yes, unity is huge for me. If we do not address this in practical, relational and biblical ways we will just keep recreating "new" church and cause even more division than we've known. I am all for new models, since the Holy Spirit creates new wine, but I fear we forget the church is not a-historical and all who call upon Christ in faith are our brothers and sisters in Christ.
1973. Scripture vs church – saw a growing disconnect that shocked me–I loved "church."
My dual interest since then has been grasping the biblical model (which I've come to think of as unchangeable principles and functions and how they are adaptable in terms of practices and forms within various cultures) and considering ways to help the church return to the biblical model.
I have great respect for the sacrifices made by many–especially pastors and their families–to serve the church the way the world has reshaped and distorted it. I have also learned that God generally works graciously and effectively with sinners (even me) where they are, not where they should be.
Art, I am in complete agreement, or at least think that I am, with what you write here. This is why I remain a non-Catholic, non-Orthodox classical, confessional, catholic Christian who loves the WHOLE church while I look for the wind of God in all of them. What I do resist is the evangelical impulse to keep reinventing and offering the "pure biblical model" as if "we've found it now." Reform yes, reinvent no.
The first thing that started me on the road to more critically examining what the scriptures say about "church†was a nasty church split that Stacy and I were involved in a number of years ago when I was "serving†as an "elder†in a "bible churchâ€. From behind the scenes I saw men push a "pastor†out due to differences of opinion over direction, the subsequently "discipline†him for "insubordination†thereby causing the "assembly†to split in two. I saw men recognized as leaders refuse to consider others as better than themselves, I saw these men refuse to love each other, I saw them refuse to show compassion and mercy, I saw them refuse to die to themselves and their agenda. During this ordeal I appealed to seek the LORD and the scriptures to no avail, I resigned from my position and was labeled as weak, abandoning the sheep during a difficult time etc. This was at a so called bible church, its Constitution and By Laws trumped all the scriptures that could be appealed to-a Protestant Talmud of sorts.
A few years later at another assembly where I was also asked to serve as an elder (this time I refused-I had not crystallized my position that eldership was a hasty compromise by Paul something that he ultimately phased out and a violation of Christ's commands at that time, but I was not signing up for that ride again) I simply taught SS and preached from time to time in the "pastors†absence. At this assembly I saw the "Pastor†a friend of mine of about 20 years suffer a nervous breakdown from the pressure of the unbiblical position that he so faithfully tried to discharge.
This and other experiences started my journey to pore over the scriptures, I examined ecclesiology, the main doctrinal systems that help to create these unbiblical systems, The Kingdom/Reign of God and the New Covenant ratified in Christ's blood.
Your blog has been very helpful and your emphasis on loving and serving others has taught em a lot.
I've arrived at a place where I can love all of my brothers and sisters no matter what structure they gather in and find unity in the person and work of Christ alone without ever joining any mans organization again.
It's been a wild ride.
Hello Alan,
I'm a seminary graduate and former pastor of three churches; two as senior pastor, and one as volunteer. I'm not exactly sure how it all started for me, but early in my third pastorate, the Holy Spirit seemed to bring some new revelations as to the state of the modern church, and how it was vastly different than what He had in mind.
I wrestled with this a great deal initially. Then, as I often did, I immersed myself into a lot of prayer, Bible reading, and meditation. I began blogging, although privately initially, because I tend to learn more through the writing experience than by reading alone.
I sensed the call out of the institutional church a little over 10 years ago, and have rarely been back since. I probably have more meaningful fellowship today than in all those previous years of ministry combined. I take encouragement in Acts 17:11 which says, "examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so (ESV)."
Though it could be taken by some as simply a religious exercise, to me daily time in the Scriptures is crucial. I can't imagine a day without that time. When one has questioned their understanding of the church, as both you and I have, I know of no other way to come to peace with it.
appreciate very much what Will said… thank you! great & challenging encouragement.
Alan, I believe there always was this "relational" component,or reality, but it is always threatened and easily lost. The Spirit is grieved. The church needs renewing. Pre-Reformation church(es) knew it as well. There is no "pristine" age pre- or post- Reformation. To some degree we are all children of the catholic church, East and/or West.
I do not wish to challenge anyone here but Will's comments move me to great sadness. One, I am sure he speaks for many who have had the same experience. Two, if this is what we're left with then I have misunderstood the Bible very badly and so have 99% of those who named Christ through the ages. The church is, if it is nothing else, a community of people not a private meeting with God. The plural "you" in Paul's letters cannot be made to fit a privatizing of the grace of God to be me without others coming with me and sharing life with me. When I read such words my heart is broken because the truth is that pain and reality is real or Will would not have written it or know it in others. But it begs for a richer, deeper solution that must include the hard work of dealing with others in a community of some kind; e.g. the form is not the issue (I think) but the reality of "us."
Brother John,
You may have misunderstood me. I'm not getting the sadness part. I rejoice that God has revealed what He did to me, and to many others as well. There is nothing "private" about my circumstances, as if I've forsaken the gathering of the saints. Like I said, I have quite possibly much greater and more often and more meaningful fellowship today than ever before. We meet in homes and restaurants and wherever the Lord may lead at that time. Don't feel sad for me, brother, but rather rejoice with me. God is and has been so very good to me and to those we fellowship with.
I am currently the pastor of a church that was established in 1949. My family and I have been here for a little over 7 years. Never have been much for tradition unless the tradition has meaning and is still useful, so questioning things is pretty normal for me. It's probably been 5 years or so since I started studying about the church and what is required for the church to be the church. What we have seen during this exercise has been interesting to say the least for this born-and-bred Southern Baptist boy!
We've transitioned quite a ways from where we started out 7 years ago, but still have a long ways to go to be the church in my opinion. The church is much more than a meeting, no matter how long it lasts, or when it starts… 😉
I have done quite a bit of reading in the past 6 months or so from the current list of authors – Cole, Viola, Comiskey, and Karr/Bergquist (the best one in my view). Haven't read as much from older sources as of yet other than the New Testament. Hoping to do a study with the church so that all of us can see what it is that the NT recommends for us to do soon.
Just because I no longer attend the traditional institutional church, does not mean that I don't fellowship very regularly; actually significantly more than I did while in the institutional church. When I tell people that, the ones who most often have a difficult time grasping the concept are those who are still involved in these traditional institutional systems.
On one of my blogs I have a caveat that says that while I have no use for institutional church systems, the people within those systems I continue to love and care for as much as God enables me to (you can find those blogs on my website). But I still haven't answered your question. Unfortunately, sometimes people misunderstand and think that my speaking against an institution is a word spoken against them. When this happens, it is usually because so much of their identity is wrapped up with that "place." Therein is the problem; Christianity was never supposed to be about a "place." Jesus isn't a "place."
Am I still able to fellowship with those who don't share my views? Not only am I able to, but I often do exactly that. The only initial difficulty, normally, is on their part, not mine. While I'm open to fellowship with whomever is interested, regardless of their background or denominational affiliation (and I totally disagree with denominationalism), they are the ones who usually tend to have issues with it.
Why? I think it has to do with the fact that many people still cannot get their heads around the fact that there are many active and God-fearing and Jesus-loving and fellowship-seeking Christians out there who no longer go to institutional churches. They rationalize that, if you are a Christian, then you "go" to church. I would argue, on the other hand, that if you are a Christian, then you "are" the church. How can you "go" to that which you "are?"
Most of those I fellowship with on a regular basis have long since stopped going to institutional churches. Having said that, there are also a number of believers who, while still regularly going to those churches, also gather with us on a semi-regular basis. I also am involved with the Christian motorcycling community, most of whom also still go to institutional churches. This has not created a problem for me, nor for most of them. We have all been saved and love to spend time together.
What constitutes a saved believer? Institutional church affiliation? Belonging to one denomination over another one? Tithing? Mode of baptism? Speaking in tongues, or, not speaking in them? None of the above. Rather it is simply, as Peter said in Acts 2:21, "And EVERYONE who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." So the criteria for fellowship is one: has that person called on the name of the Lord? If so, I MUST be willing to fellowship with them. This is not an option. Nor is it simply a suggestion.
John 3:8 says, "The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit." If we are truly born of the Spirit, and listening to Him, it may be that on Sunday morning He leads us to such-and-such an institutional church. It may also be that He leads us to a nursing home to spend time with an elderly saint. It may be that God leads us to a park, because that is where He will sovereignly cross our path with someone else that He wants us to talk to. The point is, are we really open to going where he leads us to go and when He calls us to do so? I wonder sometimes.
There is a great video (about 10 minutes long) by Simple Churches. If you haven't seen it yet, it is on my homepage of my website. I think it will answer a lot of questions that your readers may have on this topic.
Hope I've answered your question. Sorry if this dragged on too much. I guess you never really take the sermon out of the preacher.
God bless.
Your brother in Christ,
One of the more difficult parts of the transition so far has been becoming comfortable talking in church! Most of us have grown up / spent our church lives listening to someone else speak while we pay attention (or not) and go about our business afterwards. Now we're talking through the text and what it means and how we're supposed to do what it says. Some folks are kinda surprised that they learn things from other people than the "preacher!" Some consider what we are doing now a "glorified Bible study" rather than a gathering of the church.
A number of things led to me starting to study the church. All my early pastors/teachers said to check everything they said against the bible. I found that many things didn't match. So I carried that with me in my pocket. After so many years, I started "re-thinking" quite a few things that I had always taken for granted. Just where were Republican politics listed in the bible? Or "tough on crime" legislation? Or church membership doctrines? In due course, ecclesiology just couldn't be ignored.
I had seen much damage both in my own life and in the lives of others created by man-made church membership ideas encountered at several churches that it led me to study what the church IS as well. This necessarily included why we gathered and what the gathering looked like and how the gathering was supposed to act when it gathered. It just mushroomed from there. I was struck by the idea of my puny involvement in a "Sunday worship service." My only action, aside from taking perfect sermon notes, was in singing the hymns. With 250 people in the building every Sunday, what would the service be like if I stayed home with a bad cold? Only 249 people would be singing, and surely all of them would notice my absence, right? And if, as Paul says, we are to pour more abundant honor on those members less seemly, and if all members are necessary to the functioning of the body, why exactly DIDN'T anybody notice when *I* was absent? Why didn't *I* notice when OTHERS were absent?
These kinds of questions plagued me and I knew I needed to find answers to them. So that launched my more thorough study of the church.
I hear to teach people how to recognize fake money you just let them study the real thing. I have not spent a lot of time studying the church. I just follow Christ and know my Bible. I go where I am led and experience God every where.
Thankfully I have never sat under bad theology so there were no bad habits to unlearn. I do ask this question in my heart "Where is the power of the Christian church?" Then I look at my life and the things I am going through.
It is not easy and not glamorous but I see God moving and working on my behalf. It is not always externally comfortable but I know it has purpose and I am committed so I press on.
God is raising up a generation not defiled by the mistakes of what is currently going wrong. He is equipping them to reach the nations. Our churches need to be less scripted and more Spirit led. Members need to understand gathering together on weekends is supposed to be about celebrating the life lived not getting fed.
We are the church. We are His Body & Bride. We are supposed to be walking worthy, bold and anointed. We've been called and sent.
My view of the church changed as a I realized what a crummy job the USA "church" was doing in advancing the Kingdom. "Church" growth doesn't even keep up with population growth. I used my skills to help market my church, helped champion small groups and learned about church planting movements. I came to see that church planting is the process by which the Kingdom advances. But as I drilled into that subject, my definition of church and its mission has changed. Basically, church is wherever two or three are gathered and where disciples are being made. That doesn't preclude large group gatherings with lots of singing and preaching etc. It's just that we shouldn't confuse those events with church.
Alan, I am very grateful for your blog as it is safe place to think out loud. I love the comments, and your Shepard heart. I have been passionate about church life for over twenty years. My problem was, at the times I would honestly look at church life, it did not look like, or function like, Jesus or the biblical account of the first century believers. Not knowing that they were options, I just did what others did, and "look past all of the inconsistencies". That worked until I was kicked out of my ministry and church by a very controlling pastor. He told me that he really did not like "pulling out his pastor badge"and using it, but he did.
Turns out it was the push my wife and I needed to look for church alternatives. We have never been happier, our lives have been transformed from lives of reading and doing the Word and obeying church leaders, to living in relationship to Jesus. Our families have seen the transformation in our lives and now they are beginning to experience their own freedom in Christ.
Through tons of Internet research, and reading volumes of books, we are now of the opinion that church was never God's idea. What we now call church, beginning with Constantine until today, is a spiritual imposter masquerading as the body of Christ. Please don't get me wrong there are hundreds of thousands of God's children in bondage in those institutions who we would love to see freed. Still there are millions of God's potential children who are yet to hear the Good News of Jesus, and that church was not God's idea, so please don't blame Him for the imposter and then damage done to the kingdom through church.
I'm not sure if I can pinpoint the time I began questioning our current model of church in America, but I had a complete paradigm shift about 18 months ago that's continuing to evolve.
I didn't grow up in a Christian home so I was never involved in church. We believed in God and knew Jesus was God's son, but that's about a far as it went. When I was 20 years old God saved me in the parking lot of a Southern Baptist megachurch. (I can explain that story if you want.) Therefore, I started attending their services. I eventually led small groups, Sunday School and even started a ministry for young couples. But I never felt like "I fit in their box", as some of my co-laborers would tell me.
My wife and I eventually left to join the launch team for a North Point partner church. After that church launched I started planning an inner-city church. I gathered a launch team and raised a significant amount of money, but something wasn't right. I think that's when God started nudging me to look at scripture. You see, I read the books, went to the conferences, passed the church planter assessments, but there was something in me that wouldn't let me continue with our plan. The thought came to me that I didn't want to create another place for people to gather on Sundays. So, I decided to take some time to just study scripture. No other books, no commentary, no podcasts, and definitely no conferences. Just the Word. Here's what I found – the word "church" is mentioned approximately 113 in the NT, but not once in the context of "go start one of these" or "invite your friends to one of these". That was huge for me because I had "be taught" that in order to reach more people we need to start more churches. I had also been taught to just invite your friends so they can experience God, as if God only works on Sunday.
This ongoing study is creating a lot of change in the way I view church as well as the way I view our culture.
For me it was simply studying the Word. I began to see the discrepancy betweenwith what is written & what is taught. Once I shared with leadership it become time to move on. Still exploring this undiscovered territory of Biblical church. In fact, I'm working on a possible blog series now.
Grew up in the NE, in & out of organized church bodies growing up…from Russian Orthodox to many Protestant denominations, to visiting Catholic churches with my friends when young, even Jewish Synagogue, I can remember. My family always had a sense of GOD being in ALL denominations and we were let to explore in our visitations. I had a very loving, Bible believing grandmother, who attended Billy Graham crusades in the 50's, and who prayed for the salvation of the whole family for years…As an older teen I came to really know JESUS, by the personal witness of my mom after she accepted the LORD into her life, through a door to door visitation of a new Baptist Pastor who was trying to build his local church body.
It wasn't until I was married and had children that I really started to notice something wasn't quite right in the places of worship that we attended…started to seek out fellowship through small bible studies & gatherings and then later, when my children were of accountability, I had a falling away from church membership of any sort…found & sought the Calvary Chapel movement & their radio broadcasts that helped me to understand the most, where I had a lot of my questions answered…these days my husband & I travel for his employment to different locations, and are able to find the LOVE of Christ and participate in where ever we've been.
- Comment Highlights for Week of March 27, 2011 | The Assembling of the Church - [...] (among many others) left a great comment on my post "What caused you to start studying the church?" Here's…
- If a person has called on the name of the Lord, I must be willing to fellowship with them | The Assembling of the Church - [...] 6, 2011 TweetShareLast week, I asked the question, "What caused you to start studying the church?" There were several…


text:
Dallas Aeronautical Services, located 20 miles south of Dallas Love Field, is a highly specialized maintenance, repair and overhaul facility focused on a niche market. According to Mike Manning, the company's vice president, DAS specializes in component repair.
"We do a significant amount of spares and rotables work for OEMs; however, we also work with both maintenance providers and owner/operators. Our specialization is working with clients who need a high quality but fast solution to their component repair requirements," he told AIN.
DAS began operations in December 2004, embodying an idea of Don Snodgrass, the company's president. Initially the MRO provided expertise, tooling and engineering support to other structural repair and manufacturing facilities.
"Some local DFW structural manufacturers would find themselves having difficulties completing a contract for the manufacture of a new flight control. We would rebuild their tooling, review their manufacturing process and retrain their employees. Many had government contracts so we would help them with their first article source inspection. We would walk them through a QAR [quality assurance representative] source inspection to meet their government contract requirements," Manning said.
""In the early days money was tight, but I was able to bring customers to the business through prior relationships and began working the phone looking for more," Manning recalled.
Snodgrass worked on a process manual and submitted paperwork for FAA Part 145 repair station approval, and DAS received its air agency certificate in November 2005. DAS's first job as a newly approved repair station was to fix a GII spoiler for Gulfstream's Appleton facility; it still supports this contract.
Facility at Capacity
Currently the MRO is operating out of a 26,500-sq-ft campus in Lancaster, Texas. It includes a 6,000-sq-ft bond shop dedicated to overhauling and repairing composite flight controls and structures.
"This is where we do components such as Gulfstream GV, G550 and GIV spoilers; Gulfstream and Learjet lower engine cowls; and floor panels, radomes and trim tabs. The bond shop has a 22-foot autoclave, a clean room, adhesive freezers and workbenches where finished parts are prepared for paint," Manning said.
The 6,000-sq-ft metal structure and paint shop has a full-size paint booth and a large walk-in oven and specialized equipment used to overhaul GII, GIII, GIV and GV/G550 thrust reversers. The company also uses the facility for projects such as replacing the upper and lower skins on Hawker leading edges, reskinning Gulfstream flaps and overhauling Challenger 300 and GIV inlets.
A third, 4,500-sq-ft building contains metal forming and cutting equipment, including two press breaks, a large sheet metal sheer, a 250-ton form press and all the tools and work space to build containers and packages for shipping completed parts.
The 4,000-sq-ft machine shop has extensive welding technology and complete four- and five-axis machining capability to build tooling and details for parts the MRO repairs because they are no longer available on the market. "This is made possible by using current OEM data and by an advanced scanning and machine tool path programming system," Manning said. There is also a 6,000-sq-ft storage facility containing substantial back inventory of bond tools and assembly fixtures as well as customer-owned containers and the MRO's rotable inventory.
"The problem we face today is that we're out of space," he said. The company has broken ground on a 54,400-sq-ft facility in Cedar Hill, Texas, that is slated to open next month.
"We have the most experienced bond and structure technicians in the industry, and that's not hyperbole," Manning said. "Our techs have repaired just about every type of aircraft flying in the western world. It is that in-depth experience that allows us to give our customers the lowest turn time and the best quality in our industry." He added, "Our rejection and warranty rates speak for themselves."
DAS works on the Gulfstream G100, G150, G200, GII, GIII, GIV, GV and G550; all Hawker 125 series; Beechjet 400 and King Airs; Bombardier Challenger 300 and 600 series and Global Express; and all Learjets. The MRO also works on radomes, thrust reverser and engine panels for the Spey, Tay and BR710 engines, thrust reverser for the RB211-535 and the V2500-1A and -5A.
The FAA Part 145 and EASA-approved repair station currently has 41 employees, with three more full-time employees in Brazil who will staff a facility being built in São José dos Campos. DAS Brazil will be submitting an application for ANAC approval as soon as the building is completed.
"We became aware of the growth of aviation in Brazil, particularly in the aging aircraft sector, coupled with the growth in its economy and political stability. Brazil has a pro-business government and it appears to be a good fit for DAS," Manning explained.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Learn more about DESGATE LIMITED. Check the company's details for free and view the Companies House information, company documents and list of directors.
Know about every new company document that is added!
Take advantage of our watch this company feature free of charge and have notifications sent directly to your inbox. Whenever a new document appears on this website, or if their particulars change, you will be immediately informed about such changes. To monitor these changes, all you need to do is click on watch this company.
|Current Assets
|£ 4,298
|£ 3,617
|Shareholder Funds
|£ -2,034,687
|Profit Loss Account Reserve
|£ -2,235,687
|Called Up Share Capital
|£ 201,000
|Net Assets Liabilities Including Pension Asset Liability
|£ -2,034,687
|Total Assets Less Current Liabilities
|£ -2,034,687
|Net Current Assets Liabilities
|£ -2,034,687
|Cash Bank In Hand
|£ 681
Information about the Private Limited Company DESGATE LIMITED has been prepared for information purposes only. It is not intended to be nor does it constitute legal advice. This is public information provided by the official company register.


text:
Mon 13th May 2013 9:00amRapturecamps's Impossibles Surf Report
some solid 3ft´ers pushing in this morning when on low tide. not many out when i checked and not that windy, rainy and cloudy
View the Impossibles Surf Report and Forecast. Rapturecamps's Reports have received a total of 156378 views.
This report has received 317 views since 13/5/13.


text:
how can i smooth fondant without a smoother? i just realized that i dont' have one... or anything similar... is there anything else i can use, or will a piece of wax paper or something like that work?
I don't use a smoother, usually cause I've lost it. I just use my hands and work quickly. Mind your rings though
I imagine anything smooth w/ a wide grip would work, preferably something squarish about the size of you hand. A box of mac n cheese?
It's a stretch, but it might work.
I don't use a smoother. I have one but it gets in my way. I work quicker smoothing with my hands. As long as your BC is smooth, you should be able to use your hands and it will turn out fine.
didn't get notification.
thanks, i guess i'll have to live without the smoother. my buttercream isn't always so smooth (look at my pics you'll faint) so we'll see what happens.
good idea about the box, if I need to I'll use that.
thanks for the replies!


text:
14k yellow gold .9mm ball link chain, adjustable up to 20", to give you that perfect look for all your pendants. This item is not hollow or overlayed, it is solid 14k gold.
Posted by Angela on 12th Apr 2017
I am so pleased with my purchases, they came in right on time and the engraved heart charm was done exceptional, so thank you very much.
Posted by Pamela on 9th Jan 2017
I'm in love with my beautiful chain. Highly recommended!
Posted by Dee on 9th Mar 2016
Thrilled with my new chain, however delicate. Had an issue and Sarraf promptly addressed it with great customer service. A company you can trust to stand behind their products. Thank you Sarraf.
Accepting Returns
If for any reason you aren't satisfied, you can return any non-engraved item in its original condition for a refund or exchange. If you have any questions about our return procedure, please don't hesitate to contact us.
Returning Your Order
To return a jewelry item to Sarraf Jewelry Inc., follow our three step process:
Sarraf Inc.
Attn: Returns
650 S. Hill St., # 728
Los Angeles, CA 90014
And Exchange
Sarraf Inc.
Attn: Exchange
650 S. Hill St., # 728
Los Angeles, CA 90014
Once your return is received, it will be reviewed by our Quality Assurance department. You will receive credit back to the same credit card which was charged to or exchange within seven business days.
Any improperly packaged, or non-insured packages will be returned to sender. Items that show signs of wear or have been resized (by a jeweler other than Sarraf Jewelry Inc.), engraved, altered, special ordered items or damaged in any way cannot be accepted for return.
* Sarraf Jewelry Inc. will not be
responsible for loss or damage of return shipments.


text:
When Megan Follows, Mr. Skin wishes she'd lead. The bosomy redhead comes from a show-business family, but she's yet to show her business. She's sexy on the Canadian series Robson Arms checking out her curvy white-panty-and-bra-clad body in the mirror, but what a better reflection of her talents to lose the underwear.Join Mr. Skin for the full bio >>
Reign (2013-2017) - as
Robson Arms (2005) - as Janice Keneally
Second Chances - as Kate Benedict
Domestic Life - as Didi Crane
Going Great - as Co host
The Baxters - as Lucy Baxter
Matt and Jenny - as Jenny


text:
Passion Trailer Starring Rachel McAdams & Noomi Rapace08/23/2012
I think you know why I've been looking forward to the 'Passion' trailer starring Rachel McAdams and Noomi Rapace… Brain De Palma.
Passion is a film about danger, erotica, double crossing and…. passion. Today we got the first trailer. For months we've been collecting pictures of the two young woman that make this film so intriguing.
Noomi Rapace and Rachel McAdams have been steaming up my computer screen all summer. But even so, it's so hard to get the tone of the film through the eyes of a stills, and until now, I didn't know how passionate and dangerous this film really is. It's got femme fatale written all over it.
The music is intense, the manipulation is front and center and Rachel McAdams can play shrewd and manipulative with ease. In the trailer you can hear it in her voice. Meanwhile Noomi Rapace is the reserved one, I think…. This film has a twist, I can feel it. The trailer screams it. Who's really the bad girl in Passions? The trailer was put together inorder to ask us that question. We'll have to wait and watch it to find out. Or be an asshole — to yourself — and read all about it on a spoiler board. Your choice.
Passion is directed by Brian De Palma (Carrie, Blow Out, Scarface, The Untouchables, Carlito's Way, Mission Impossible, Snake Eyes, The Black Dahlia, Redacted), and the film is actually a remake of the 2010 French film Love Crime directed by Alain Corneau, starring Kristen Scott Thomas and Ludivine Sagnier as two feuding corporate executives. In this version, a young businesswoman named Isabelle (Rapace) plots murderous revenge after her boss and mentor Christine (McAdams) steals some of her fresh ideas. Things only get more complicated when Isabelle ends up in bed with one of Christine's lovers.
Passion Trailer
Similar posts
Under The Dome 2x12 Turn Promo and Synopsis
Under The Dome 2x12 Turn Promo and Synopsis Here's the new promo for the next episode of Un...
Arrow 2x22 Streets Of Fire First Look Pics
Arrow 2x22 Streets Of Fire First Look Pics Here are the official Promotional Pictures from t...
Reign 1x20 Higher Ground Clip
Reign 1x20 Higher Ground Clip Tonight on Reign 1x20 Higher Ground watch Queen Catherine conf...
The Walking Dead Chandler Riggs Comic Con Interview This is an interview of Chandler Riggs w...


text:
Gran Turismo is one of the most popular racing simulators on the planet and has increasingly become a platform for carmakers to showcase design concepts and special editions. True to this trend, the MINI Design Team has created a virtual MINI Clubman Vision Gran Turismo concept for the sim for Playstation 3.
Vision Gran Turismo is the virtual celebration of the success and achievements of MINI in motorsport, and was designed to maximise racing performance in the sim. An incredible level of realism and detail have gone into development of the HD version of the Clubman, so let's take a closer look at the car.
As you can see, MINI has scarcely left any body panel untouched, and the front of the Clubman gets a serious reworking, with a huge carbon apron and extra ducting to lend it serious motor racing functionality. The grille gets a set of extra headlights, while the main headlamp consoles feature LED runners between the black 'X' design, harking back to MINIs of yesteryear that had taped 'X' markings on the headlights to prevent glass shattering and falling on to the track surface in the case of an impact. Also seen are retro-style upright wipers.
The side view shows off extensive bodywork remodelling, with powerful, clear lines and super-aggressive contours resulting in a three-dimensional effect. The strong, road-hugging profile reflects the high-performance capability of the 395 hp, sequentially-geared virtual machine. It needed to be, with the Vision Gran Turismo capable of 0-100 km/h in 3.9 seconds, all the way up to a top speed of 290 km/h, depending on gearbox ratios.
Gamers will get used to the super-aggressive rear section design, with a huge diffuser, wide wheel arches and extra air vents that form a cohesive end to the all-round performance-oriented styling. You can still see the split tailgate of the original version, albeit running only up to the rear fender. Not sure about the twin roof spoilers though...


text:
10 Mar 2007
Pacific World Fresh
A look at the new face of Pacifikan music. New technologies and multi cultural influences are absorbed and recontextualized by each passing generation of artists, and new acts like Nesian Mystik and Spacifix have embraced change - but are they bringing with them traditional themes and values? Trevor Reekie talks to members of Spacifix and Neasian Mystic, as well as elder Rev. Mua Strickson-Pua for Music 101.


text:
Ozone has a major impact on Groundwater Remediation
Perhaps one of the most noteworthy products we offer at Ozone Solutions, Inc is our RMT remediation systems. Ozone, which occurs quite readily in nature, turns out to be the second most powerful sterilant in the world. To date, there has not been a single bacterium, virus, mold or cyst discovered that can withstand the power of ozone. Therefore, ozone has become an imperative solution for pilot testing, farmers, and many environmental companies. Our systems inject ozone into the soil to destroy MTBE (methyl tertiary butyl ether) hydrocarbon contaminants, diesel fuel, TCE, pesticides, chlorinated solvents, VOC's, and aliphatic & polyaromatic hydrocarbons. The advantages of ozone is that is more soluble than oxygen in water, moves easily through the soil, is produced on-site, and has no need for hazardous chemical transportation or storage. On top of it all, it is the most powerful oxidizer available. Ozone has the ability to break down complex organics into carbon dioxide or less toxic molecules. Lastly, one of the most important characteristics to ozone is that it decomposes into oxygen, which increases DO levels. Our custom-made RMT-trailer series is a complete packaged turn-key remediation trailer that was built specifically for the ground water remediation industry. AECOM, a very well-known global engineered company, uses ozone technology in their environmental services to help industrial clients around the world solve some of the most complex challenges. For example, AECOM implements this practice by utilizing our RMT remediation system to treat ground water by breaking down impurities such as hydrocarbons, MTBE and VOC's in the water.
- Dimensions are dependent on system requirements
• 20 g/hr to 5000 g/hr with a minimum of 1 and an unlimited number of outputs
• Turn-key trailer is ready for operation upon delivery
• 50 PSI Sparge Pressure up to 90 PSI breakthrough pressure
• Trailers are steel frame construction for complete security
• Well Manifold timing performed with a touch screen interface
• Integrated telemetry package for remote monitoring or operation via internet connections.


text:
Her name is Olivia and she's a fashion model. She's hosting a channel and the company hired her because according to them, she's a perfect "10." I think she's about an 8/10, I love her huge butt and she has a decent face. What do you guys think?
Most Helpful Girl
post the link in an opinnion comment for ease of viewing?00|00|0
Here you go.
- Show AllShow Less
to be honest i like to keep a lean body with little body fat. i like sports and working out and i prefer eating as healthy as possible. i really dont want to look like anyone besides myself either... as far as butts and her body it looks like kim kardashians but chunkier, im not trying to talk shit im sure she is pretty and nice but I don't know i would much rather look like myself than her or any other girl (with the exception of cara delevinge haha)
They both probably have fake butts anyway. It's good you're so confident about your body though!
Most Helpful Guy
is this real life?
her butt/hips/legs are just massive bro! way too much, she is hot though, i agree she is an 8/1000|00|0
Her legs aren't big, nor are her hips. It's mainly her butt.
- Show AllShow Less
I would pay her so much money to have sex with her lol.
i think i would havesex with her, but only a one time thing
oh and also i would never pay for sex lol


text:
8 Reflections on Intimacy
by Nicole Daedone Sep 10, 2016
September 12, 2010
We usually reserve the word intimacy to describe the relationship that develops when we and another fall mutually in love. We open our hearts, our minds and our senses to our beloved, and they open to us in return. Connecting in this way makes us feel special and irreplaceable. It gives us a sense of having a place in the world. Because we tend to equate intimacy with romantic relationships, when the quality of intimacy is missing from our lives, our first impulse may be to try to find one. But if we limit our search for intimacy to the search for romantic partner, we are thinking way too small. We can become intimate with our food, our homes, our daily tasks and the tools we use to accomplish them. We can become intimate even with that which annoys us: the interruption, the traffic jam, the inclement weather. We can become intimate with our aches and pains, our hopes and desires, our fears and failures. When we show up in this way for our everyday experience, the entire world becomes our beloved.
Intimacy has been my lifelong quest. I am still learning how to achieve it. Each of the discoveries I will share has helped me to become more intimate with myself and the world. I hope they will be helpful to you as well.
1. Loving creates lovability
I grew up an only child in suburban Los Gatos. One of my closest friends, Maria, came from a large, warm, rambunctious Chilean family. I envied the love that seemed to surround her.
Maria's most cherished possession was her bicycle. She rode it everywhere and took very good care of it. She had such a passion for that bike that she learned everything about how it worked and what it needed, and eventually got a job repairing bikes for other people. The love she felt for her bike made it glow – made it seem like the most desirable object on earth. I wanted that same feeling. In fact, I wanted to feel even more of it than she did. I figured that if I bought a better bike than hers, my bike would glow even more.
So I bought one that was top of the line. But somehow its glow eluded me. I rarely rode it, and its presence in my garage began to feel vaguely reproachful, a thorn in my side. I almost came to hate it. In my mind, this was definitely the bike's fault.
One day, my friend's beloved bike was stolen. She borrowed mine and rode it everywhere. To my amazement, it began to have the same magical glow I had so envied in her old bike. So naturally I wanted it back. But once I got it, I still didn't really feel like riding it, and it soon resumed its reproachful sulk in mygarage. It refused to glow for me.
A lot of people approach looking for love as I approached bike shopping. We want a top of the line model. We have a list of desirable qualities and imagine that desire itself will arise when we find someone who possesses those qualities. If love is absent from our lives, we may believe it is because we have not yet encountered someone sufficiently lovable. We are expecting love to be activated by its object.
What made any bike that Maria possessed seem so desirable was the love she lavished on it. The glow was not in the bike itself, but in her relationship to it.
Like bicycles, people become more desirable when we are attentive to them. Their most lovable qualities reveal themselves to us only after we have begun to love them. Loving is the polish. Anything and anyone we cherish and care for will glow for us.
2. Desire is a teacher
My bike didn't satisfy me because a bike was not what I truly wanted. It was a symbol of what I found so enviable in my friend: the way she was surrounded by love, so rich in love, that even inanimate objects were somehow animated by it.
She had a power of connecting to her world that I seemed to lack. I imagined I could attain that inner state by imitating its outward form.
Our knee-jerk reaction to desire is to focus all our efforts on obtaining whatever it is we think we want. While that is happening, we experience the feeling of desire and the object of desire as inseparable. Had you asked me "What is the true nature of your desire?" I would have responded, "I want a bike." So long as we are in hot pursuit of the object, it appears as simple as that. We rarely contemplate desire itself unless its object is hopelessly unattainable or, like my bicycle, proves disappointing once attained. Thwarted or disappointed desire is good for us – though it doesn't feel good when it is happening. Only when separated from its object does the quality of desire itself begin to speak to us. It has a lot to tell us about who we truly are.
There is a deeper, often concealed aspect to all impulses. We tend to move in the direction the impulse tells us to go rather than into the impulse itself. The more we fixate on the object of desire, the more we are carried away from ourselves. We miss what the desire is trying to tell us. At these times we can't actually be intimate with anyone else because, in the very act of pursuing them, we have fallen out of intimacy with ourselves.
One way to become intimate with your own desires is to introduce a gap between impulse and action. We do this when we meditate. Maybe while sitting you start to wish you were drinking a cup of coffee instead. In its absence, that coffee becomes more and more desirable. You fantasize getting up and making a beeline for the coffee urn, inhaling the coffee-scented steam as you fill your cup, taking the first, best sip. But you can't do any of this until the gong rings, and that ring is still twenty minutes away. At the moment, there is nothing to do but to hang out with your coffee fantasy and the inner state that has given rise to it. Maybe you are thirsty. Maybe you are feeling foggy or sleepy or bored. Maybe something in you resents the discipline you are imposing on yourself and wants to feel indulged. By sitting with the impulse instead of acting on it, you experience its unique taste and texture—which is your unique taste and texture. You become intimate with yourself.
3. What you truly desire will be found in the dark
A teacher I knew of was dying, and I had flown to Hawaii to meet with him in person for the first and last time. There would be three group interviews over the course of three days.
Whatever transpired between us during those three meetings would have to last me for the rest of my life. On the first day, he asked me, "What do you want?" I froze. To offer any response that fell short of my deepest, truest desire would be to waste one of my precious few encounters with him. I wanted to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. But at that moment, I could not for the life of me identify what it might be. The only desire I could get in touch with was the desire to please him with my answer. Between me and my deepest desire – whatever it was – an internal censor had interposed itself, intent on naming a desire that the teacher would deem worthy. I mumbled something about moving into the Zen center and devoting my life to spiritual practice.
That was what I thought I was supposed to want.
The teacher responded, "Very interesting" and then, apparently losing all further interest, added, "I'll see you tomorrow." From this I gathered that my answer had been wrong.
I had been caught off guard, unprepared. Determined not to let that happen again, I lay awake that night revising my answer, mentally rehearsing my new, improved version of it. Sure enough, the question came again the following day, and I offered the response I had memorized. I can no longer remember what it was, exactly. Something about wanting to get enlightened. "Very interesting," he replied. "I'll see you tomorrow."
By now I was starting to panic. I'd blown my first two chances with him, and only one remained. It dawned on me that if I was losing this badly giving the "right" answers, there was little more to lose by giving a wrong one. My internal censor dropped its guard just long enough for a wrong answer to make itself known. It was an appalling answer, but the truth of it was undeniable.
On the third day, the teacher asked, "What do you want?"
I said: "I want to take over your seat when you die."
A sort of gasp arose in the room, followed by a stunned silence. I felt hideously exposed, and utterly mortified. A lifetime seemed to pass before the teacher broke into a smile and everyone in the room exhaled.
"Now we have something interesting to talk about," he said.
Desire and dissembling seem to go hand in hand. Even when we fully intend to tell the truth about what we want, we have a hard time doing so. Our deepest desires reside at a layer beneath judgment. It's so dark and obscure down there that we assume whatever lives there must be really bad. To get to it, we have to slip past the internal censor whose self-appointed mission is to conceal what lies at our core.If we can't slip past that, we may spend most of our lives pursuing what we think we're supposed to want, perpetually dissatisfied because what we truly want is a difficult-to-penetrate mystery. We keep throwing offerings into that underground volcano of yearning without ever appeasing it. Like an inefficient charity that squanders most of its funds on administrative costs, we never reach the hunger.
4. Being good doesn't get you loved
I almost blew my chance to connect with that teacher because I was trying so hard to be good. My concept of what "good" might mean was largely a projection of what I figured it meant to him.
It wasn't what he truly wanted to receive from me, nor was it what I truly wanted to give. This whole notion of "good" was an officious middleman so intent on managing our encounter that the love I felt could scarcely get a word in edgewise.
To paraphrase Tina Turner, "What's good got to do with it?"
Just as we may list the "specs" that we would like our hypothetical beloved to possess, we hope that matching another's list of specs will cause them to love us. We try to present the qualities on our "good" list, and to suppress the evidence of those on our not-so-good list. In the short run, it is often possible to pull this off. But we can never really feel secure in love that is won this way. Sooner or later, a crack will appear in the beautiful illusion we are creating – and what then?
The love that truly hits the spot for us, the love that feels like love on those blessed occasions when we receive it, is love that is unearned, love that we're not entirely sure we deserve. We long to relax into a love that doesn't avert its gaze from our flaws, faults and foibles, a love that persists after those pastel veils with which we first sought to attract it have been torn to shreds.
If we yearn to be loved when we are in the wrong, why do we struggle so hard to remain constantly in the right? Perhaps it is because we are resisting the painful truth that it is not in our power to make someone else love us. We settle instead for trying to make them approve of us. Yet, until we have disappointed someone, the love they profess for us just glances off the gleaming surface of our armor. Unless we reveal the chink in that armor, their love can't penetrate to the soft vulnerable places that crave love the most, and are helpless to earn or deserve it.
5. Falling is the best way down
Falling in love is good. Most other kinds of falling we think of as bad. We don't like falling into – into debt, or error, or despair. Nor do we like falling from – from favor, from grace, from some pinnacle of achievement.
Our entire anatomy is unanimous in the desire to avoid a fall. We don't want to belly flop, land on our asses, or pitch flat on our faces.
To fall in love is to reverse this natural and universal aversion to being unexpectedly conquered by gravity. It is to surrender to the very thing we spend most of our upright hours trying to avoid. If you would like to fall in love, other kinds of falling are good practice.
As a toddler, you learned to stand, and then to walk, by falling a lot. Often children bawl and weep when this happens, and you might think it's because falling hurts them physically. But the curious thing (perhaps you've noticed this too) is that if a toddler isn't aware that you are watching, she doesn't cry when she falls. She just picks herself up and starts to walk again. The toddler who cries when there is an adult witness is probably doing so out of embarrassment. To fall in front of people who never seem to fall themselves feels shaming. That's also true of the various falls we suffer, or do our best to avoid suffering, as adults. What gets bruised most is our pride.
Yet something in us seems attracted to falling. Many of the things we do for sport involve the risk of it, and the very point of some sports – skydiving, bungee-cord jumping – is to fall on purpose. It's a thrill. In the non-sporting aspect our lives, we precipitate accidents that, on later reflection, may turn out to be not altogether accidental, as if some part of us were out to trip up the rest of us. We see this in stars or politicians who, just when everything seems to be going their way, commit some stupid crime or indiscretion that is sure to be found out. I'm feeling the same temptation myself these days, on the eve of some publicity that's about to put me in the limelight. That's where I've wanted to be, but now that it's shining on me, I feel the urge to take a pratfall.
This part of us that is shamed yet enticed by the prospect of falling is vital to our capacity to connect. Our deepest desires lie beneath the layer of judgment, and falling is how we get there. The moments of intimacy that thrill us most and connect us best come when we have invited another into some region of ourselves where shame is a clear and present danger.
6. You're going to get wet
Intimacy requires lubrication—and I'm not just talking about sexual intimacy. Moisture moves, and facilitates movement. It is the medium of connection. It allows us to melt into one another. If we try to connect without it, we just rub each other raw.
The human body melts a little wherever it comes in contact with the soul. The sign of this melting is an involuntary physical reaction: laughing, weeping, blushing, goose bumps, sexual arousal, orgasm. Some of these reactions are literally wet. And while some of them can be faked, when they occur spontaneously, they never lie. For better or worse, what we really feel is on display, impossible to conceal from ourselves or others. It can be embarrassing.
But why is it embarrassing? Why do we so often feel like apologizing when our bodies reveal our souls?
The first thing we learn to feel shame about, when we are very little, is the inopportune appearance of bodily fluids. At precisely the same time we are learning to say "I" we are also learning that this "I" is not supposed to leak. The very first task we undertake as "I" is to try to get the leaking under control. "I" means the one in charge, the controller of the previously uncontrollable. To our toddler minds, "I" equals dry. Involuntary equals wet. Wet is the icky failure of "I."
So you see the problem. Intimacy happens when we get "wet," when what we are truly feeling leaks out and reveals itself to another. The command-and-control center called "I" is intent on preventing this and feels shamed when it can't. The shame has little to do with the actual reactions of others. They might be touched when we weep, charmed when we blush, thrilled when our bodies belie sexual arousal. Nevertheless, we feel that we have lost control, are afraid of being judged for it even when no one else is judging. Intimacy requires a letting go which, to the "I," feels like the shaming, and potentially dangerous, failure of "I" altogether.
Perhaps you can also see the tremendous spiritual potential here. If our aspiration is to liberate ourselves from our oppression by the inner command-and-control center, we must be willing to step out of the hot dry world of thought and into the juicy, fecund festival of spontaneity that reveals the true world.
7. When your heart hurts, it needs to get bigger
Pity the poor command center. It only wants what it thinks best for us—to make us safe, and good, and approved. It is ever-vigilant on our behalf, hardly ever falling down on the job, or complaining of fatigue. It needs love too. If you would like it to relax and let you enjoy the world, you need to understand what it is so agitated about. So let's see if we can address one of its biggest concerns.
Whenever we get wounded, or thwarted, or disappointed in our quest for intimacy, the inner manager assumes it is somehow to blame. Immediately it sets to work trying to identify where it went wrong. It chose the wrong person, or failed to heed the red flags, allowed us to give or to reveal too much, or to take some reckless risk. Momentarily suckered by the hope that this time would be different, it allowed us to fall into a familiar negative pattern, not recognizing the same old same old until it was too late.
No matter how it diagnoses the problem, the inner manager tends to apply the same remedy: contraction. It tightens and folds in on itself, trying to protect the wounded spot from further harm. It drafts new policies, rules and regulations, intended to prevent a reoccurrence. It adds new items to the evergrowing list of danger signs it must take note of next time. The more diligent it is about this, the fewer the options it will allow us to exercise. The more it contracts, the more our world shrinks. If you would like it to stop doing this, you need to give it a better idea.
My own command center faced its absolute worse case scenario when my ex-husband got together with my former best friend. Since we still had many mutual friends, I was constantly getting updates on the progress of their affair. The only way to block it out seemed to be to block out these other friends as well. My world kept getting smaller and smaller and smaller. But the whole thing was so excruciating, what else could I do but block it out? The worst of it was that I still loved my ex-husband and former friend. The only way to block that was to keep up a running prosecution in my head. Day and night, my would-be inner protector kept up a steady stream of speeches addressed to an imaginary jury, as if nothing short of a felony conviction could keep me safe.
One day my friend Lauren said, "What if instead of trying to push them away, you put them in the center of your heart?" That was a pretty scary prospect, but the effort of pushing them out of my heart was exhausting me, so I decided to give Lauren's suggestion a try. Tentatively, I opened my heart, exploring how it felt to hold them there. To my surprise, what I had conceived of as unendurable pain melted into a tenderness, a sweetness, and my world, which had gotten so small, expanded until it was vast—vaster than any world I had previously known, and filled with this tender sweetness. In this enlarged world that was my own heart, my victim story shrank until it was all but imperceptible. It felt less like something that had happened to me, than something that had just happened, period – a passing event in a world large enough to contain that and so much more. The worst pain I had ever felt was not, after all, unendurable. I could bear it, and then some.
When you want to dilute salty water, you can add fresh water a drop at a time. Or you can pour the salt water into a bathtub. Better yet, you can pour it into a freshwater lake. The larger the container, the more diluted the salt — the pain — becomes.
Your inner manager will never give up its effort to protect you — for that's what it sees as its job. But you can teach it to relieve rather than avoid pain, to expand instead of contracting.
8. True love dies
I was already committed to my current partner, Reese, when I realized that I had fallen out of love with him. It seemed to happen suddenly, and it was a great loss to me. I blamed him for his failure to go on inspiring in me the feeling that I had called "being in love." In fact, I hated him for it.
As luck would have it (bad luck for Reese), I was at that time doing a radical honesty practice that obliged me to blurt out exactly what I was feeling at any given moment, no matter what the consequences. Thus, Reese was subjected to hourly bulletins on the status of my disillusionment with him. "I hate the way you chew your food," I would announce over dinner. He responded to my insults with equanimity, neither complaining nor retaliating. "You hate the way I chew my food," he would acknowledge calmly. "I hear that." I found this utterly inscrutable. Why wasn't he freaking out, as I was, over the demise of our romance? How could he stand it? How could he stand me? He had become a mysterious stranger, with unfathomable powers. He fascinated and excited me.
A love that never dies is no love at all, for love is the life force, and whatever lives is also constantly in the process of dying. You may, one night, lie down next to your love and wake up the next morning to find it gasping and blue in the face. When that happens, we tend to commence emergency procedures. You might return to the scene of your first date or first kiss, hoping to recapture the old magic. You might reread your old love letters, trying to remind yourself of what you're supposed to feel. When the old formula fails—as usually it does —your efforts to revive the love become increasingly frantic. You pound on its sternum as if administering CPR. The more you bang away at it, the deader it looks.
Like falling in love, falling out of it is a downward journey. It carries us past our inner managers, judges and censors to connect with who we are at our core. That place is the source of our life and the source of all love. If we refuse to be carried down there, nothing new can be born. Sometimes what is reborn, when we surrender to the fall, is love for our current partner. There are no guarantees, but that's often what happens. Before a new love can be born, though, you have to show up for the funeral of the old one.
(Photo Credit: Tim Marshall)


text:
The Scotch, Malts and Our Cocktails
HIGHLANDS has one of the most extensive Scotch and Malt lists in the USA. We are passionate about what we do here with our Beverage Director, Andrey Kalinin, carefully selecting the finest Whiskey's out there from Scotland. We are also pleased to offer, Scotch Flights where our Staff will teach and educate you on the great uniqueness and different flavor profiles and regions of Scotch.
HIGHLANDS has won numerous awards including Whisky Magazine naming us one of the Best Whiskey Bars in the USA.


text:
More collaboration means more opportunities
Partnering For An Exciting Future
Our dedicated partner team can work with you to support our joint proposition and create new business opportunities.
Looking to scope out new development work or an integration upgrade? Access our guides to find out more.
See how our dedicated vertical expertise can support our partnership.


text:
Talk:Differential geometry of curves
|WikiProject Mathematics
|(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
So far, this page just collects up material from various places. It clearly needs editorial work, and the addition of further topics.
Charles Matthews 08:49, 9 May 2004 (UTC)
Request for picture[edit]
It would be nice if someone could add a picture illustrating tangent vector, normal vector, binormal vector and osculating plane for a three dimensional curve. MathMartin 15:32, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
- I added an illustration, although it doesn't show the osculating plane. Mark.Howison 21:06, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm fairly sure the definition given for the Frenet vectors is wrong. E.g, the second vector, the normal, is given as c"/|c"|, which is proportional to the acceleration, and can be tangent to the curve.
However, I'm not completely certain of the correct definition for n dimensions. Could someone check and correct?
- Yes they are probably wrong, I am checking the definitions.MathMartin 12:57, 22 May 2004 (UTC)
Also, is there any particular reason for the inner product notation. Writing the formulae as dot products, and suppressing most of the arguments, would make the page look less cluttered, and hence make the essential core of the formulae much clearer. Carandol 21:12, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
- I prefer the dot product because it is harder to confuse with scalar multiplication.
- The inner product notation is less familiar to most people, and takes up more space.
- What do you mean by suppressing most of the arguments ?
- Not explicitly stating the dependance on t every time. I think its easier to interpret
- than
- because the second formulation contains inessential details. Carandol 05:14, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
- I know the page is too cluttered at the moment, but I am still working on the page trying to find a good, coherent way to present the material. I will declutter the page in a few days. What is the deal with using v and v dot in the proof ? The dot notation (for derivatives) is not used on the page and v (as a vector) is not defined. I would like to remove the proof completely as it seems unneccessary. MathMartin 12:57, 22 May 2004 (UTC)
- The proof probably is unnecessary. It should be enough to state the result, but I didn't want to change the structure of the page. However, the previous proof was incorrect because it claime the differential of c'/|c'| was c"/|c'|.
If we were stating the proof it would be to use an arbitary vector v, without inconvenient scalar factors to differentiate. Carandol 05:14, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
I would like the page to focus on the main theorem of differential curve theory and the methods used in differential geometry of curves. The important definitions should be on this page too. The more abstract curve stuff on general topological spaces is on the curves page but exactly what definitions belong to what page is still open, there is some unnecessary redundancy. I have to speak with User:Tosha as soon as this page has reached a sufficient maturity.
If you would like some more focus on physics (which seems likely as you speak of speed, acceleration and dot product) I would prefer to put it on a different page, perhaps the examples page, or a usage of differential geometry in physics page.
- Not focus on physics, appeal to physical intuition Carandol 05:14, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
In any case it would be nice if you could leave the structure and focus of the page unchanged for a few more days until I am finished. I am of course very grateful for spellchecks and the remark on the frenet vectors.MathMartin 12:57, 22 May 2004 (UTC)
I will put all my replies here, because the deep indentations are too much for my brain :).
I want to keep the following notation
instead of the simpler
The article should deal with differential geometry on an arbitrary Riemannian manifold (I have not made this clear) and therefore I think
is more apropriate and less ambiguous than the slightly shorter
But you are correct that people used to euclidean space might only know the last notation.
I would prefer to keep the reference to the variable t because the frenet vector ei depends on t. The moving frame part of the frenet frame should be made clear because it is the central concept to differential geometry of curves.
I agree that your notation is simpler and might highlight the essential details better but it assumes the reader knows of the unwritten conventions (like dropping the t which in a different context means ei does not depend on t).
- Just as the page currently assumes the reader knows about inner products, which are too large a subject to explain on this page. We could explicitly state we're dropping the t.
- The biggest problem with the current format is the double brackets, the <a(t),b(t)>. Even though they're different in shape, it still takes the unpractised eye a perceptible moment to match them up correctly. How about a simple <a,b> with an explicit statement of convention? That would have most of the clarity advantages of my earlier suggestion, but would work equally well in non-Euclidean spaces. Carandol
- Ok, you convinced me. The double brackets are bad. So we put a note somewhere (?) in the article that we drop t but we keep the inner product notation.MathMartin 17:23, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
- Use the full notation, with (t) once, for the first appropriate equation, then say immediately afterwards something like "To keep the notation simple, rather than explicitly stating the dependance on t every single time, we will simply assume all quantities are functions of t, unless we explicitly state otherwise. This lets us write the last equation more simply as ... " Carandol
I want the article to be accessible to people who do not know the subject so I think it is better to have a more verbose and less ambiguous notation than the other ways round.
- But we have to compromise somewhere, or the essential details get lost amidst the the thickets of explanation. Vectors themselves are a compact way of stating lists of coordinates with many implicit properties, assumed without a full explanation. The only question is precisely what level of compromise is appropriate for this topic, and you are putting forth a pretty good case. Carandol
What we could do is make a seperate page for curves in 2 and 3 dimensional euclidean space for people who want to look up certain formulas. The notation on the new page could be briefer and use dot notation.
- I think the current Frenet-Seres page does much of that. Perhaps it could be expanded upon, or used as a basis for other pages covering different aspects of this topic in 2 & 3 dimensions at the same level, in compact dot notation. Carandol
- I do not like the current Frenet-Serret page. Too much proof and no overall concept or explanation. I would like to see a page about plane and cubic curves together with the frenet serret formulas and the curve theorem. I already tried to talk a bit about the tangent, normal and binormal vectors in my page (as I think those concept are important for many people) but it does not really fit in well. The formulas to calculate those vectors simplify quite a bit in 3-dimensions. We only have to take care the notation stays compatible in some sense.MathMartin 17:23, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
- It could do with some improvement, once we establish what it should cover, and a suitable notation. I've written a little on the same subject at Wikibooks, http://wikibooks.org/wiki/Calculus:Vectors#Tangent_and_Normal_Vectors. Those two sections do make more assumptions than appropriate for an encyclopedia, since they are in a book, and they don't cover as much as you're suggesting, because of the target for that book, but still: would that general approach be useful for this encylopedia? Carandol 18:37, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
- I do not know :) My point is I am currently studying differential geometry so I want to write about differential geometry. I understand that most people want to do vector calculus in R^3 and do not need the Schmidt-orthogonalization algorithm to construct a Frenet frame. They only need tangent, normal and binormal vector and call this frame TNB Frame. As we are in R^3 we can simplify the equations (for example define B := T x N). When they use wikipedia to look up definition they would probably be confused by my page and even more confused by the curve page. But although I understand the need for a 2,3 dimensional differential geometry of curves page I will probably not contribute to it. So it is completely yours as far as I am concerned.
- What I am trying to say is my differential geometry page is probably getting too big so it makes sense to split it into 2 pages. One focussing on the general theory and one on 2,3 space. It may be apropriate to use a slighly different notation on 2,3 space page. But nonetheless the pages (including the curves page) should be compatible in some sense so people can easily look up the more abstract definitions. So I would like to have a curve(topological space) <- differential geometry (Riemannian manifold) <- 2,3 Euclidean space, where the abstraction increases towards the curve page.
- The next topic I am going to write on is surfaces in a riemannian manifold.
- MathMartin 19:14, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
On a sidenote should the curve be denoted by
I have seen all three notations in wikipedia but I think it should be uniform.
- γ is more abstract, but C makes think of a constant. On balance I'd say γ Carandol
- I agree, γ is best. But before we change the notation we should ask User:Tosha if he will change his notation too.
It would be nice to get the opinions of some other people too. MathMartin 14:29, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
Certainly Carandol 16:56, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
- is the best, the only problem it looks bit ugly in the line (sometimes on some browsers), but hopefully in a few years with MathML everything will be nice. c would be the second choice. The page looks good, I think it is ok to move most of diff.geom subsection from curve, although I would leave basic definition. I think length and jordan curve should stay in curve, but it is ok if you would repeat it here. Infact I would limit this page to smooth case only, it would make it more compact, the abstract definition of length and some other things would not be needed anymore. It would make it simpler and more usefull for phisics. If you want I may try to do that, and you can alwas reverse it back.
Tosha 18:05, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
- It makes sense to only use smooth curves on differential geometry of curves page. I think the length definition should remain (only in terms of c'(t) and not the abstract definition) even if duplicated on your page. You can remove the definition for jordan curve from my page. You can do the edits and I will check later.
- Is there any convention for using inline symbols (like γ etc.). On my browser (Mozilla) it looks good and most math pages use lots of inline. So I think we should change to γ even if it renders badly on some browsers.
- MathMartin 20:35, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
Tosha 22:15, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
I'd just like to note that on my browser gamma prime ()is hard to distinguish from just gamma (). Its just the way it gets rendered, but someone who doesnt realize it should be a differentiation might not realize it. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 18:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Frenet-Serret formulas[edit]
I think this sub-section written much better than the article Frenet-Serret formulas, maybe it is better to move this there? Tosha
- I do not know if this is a good idea. The Differential geometry of curves article is already quite long and perhaps the Frenet-Serret formulas deserves a page of its own. But the current page should be heavily edited and the two articles should be made more compatible. I think the long proof should be deleted and some examples could be added (User:Charles Matthews has already added an introduction).MathMartin 22:08, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I just had a look at Frenet-Serret formulas article and I am not in the mood for editing it. But although the article is in bad shape I think the article should stay in a somewhat different form, like an intuitive example (explanation) of the Frenet-Serret formulas in 3 dimensions. I talked with User:Carandol about this some time ago (see thread above). So if you intend to delete most of the page drop him a short note perhaps he is interested in a rewrite.MathMartin 22:25, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I agree with this (the proof should be deleted) but I would also delete whole page Frenet-Serret formulas and move the section from here to Frenet-Serret formulas. so diff geom of curves would get smaller and better and Frenet-Serret formulas will get better. I'll talk to User:Carandol Tosha
Sounds ok, I just think it is a good thing to keep the different notation in Frenet-Serret formulas article (perhaps in the form of an example for R3), so that a reader coming from engineering background or from [Wikibook Calculus] is able to get a intuitive grasp on the content. If User:Carandol is not interested in doing it, I might add the example later.MathMartin 09:16, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Having derived a neat form for radius of curvature, but using only 3D space:
where my corresponds to your
I was delighted to find that I could derive my formula from your definitions. Seeing that you have put a helpful example of what one of your formulae simplifies to in 3D, viz binormal vactor, may I similarly add my formula? (And I can see that using is a good idea!) Very helpful page, thank you. I was able to catch up on the whole multi-dimensional (ie >3D) way of doing things. --Ian.patient 09:58, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
- Hi Ian and welcome to wikipedia. Generally articles here are written by several people so no one owns a page. But in this case most of the article has been contributed by me so I think I can accept your compliment :). You are free to edit the page and one of the wikipedia maxims is to be bold in your edits so if you think you can improve the page go ahead.
- As can be seen from the discussion above there is some need for a discussion of curves in 3 dimensional space, so you might want to consider starting a new article on this topic. Differential geometry of curves is already quite long and I think the main article should mostly deal with the general n-dimensional case. There are also Curves in differential geometry and Frenet-Serret formulas which deal with more concrete examples. MathMartin 12:25, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
Tengent Vector[edit]
You should probably start this section by stating that the tangent vector is γ'(t) (as appears in the top of the DGoC entry), before discussing it's direction (unit vector) and length.
A circle is a curve that is perpendicular to its tangent vector? Maybe I am missing something - but when is a curve EVER perpendicular to its tangent? I think there is something screwy there, needs to be clarified.
Answer for the last question[edit]
No, If you take a strait line, it is paralel to its tangent and not perpendicular!
A circle is perpendicular to its tangent in any point on it and the differential equation it yields gives:
for some hence
which is a circle.
Niv.sarig 21:33, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Note that it is not the curve that is perpendicular to its tangent (of course not), it is the vector drawn from the origin to the point where you take the tangent. I think this is what the question was about. -- josce —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 12:51, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Can someone please add some references to this article? Thanks! Liransh 19:34, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- Started: Added a new section called Additional Reading with first reference (Kreiszig). TomyDuby (talk) 01:12, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Length and natural parametrization[edit]
I have two problems with this section:
1. There is no definition in this article for smooth curve. Elsewhere, smooth function is defined as a function that has derivatives of all orders.
2. Surely a curve γ(t) does not have derivatives of all orders in order to be able to calculate its length. It is enough if it is once differentiable: he integral requires only γ'(t).
TomyDuby (talk) 02:06, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
- On the first point: indeed, this article goes through the pains of defining various smoothness classes of parametrized curves, but ends up not using them other than by the way of cluttering the text (this is, however, a common problem in all treatments of the foundations of differential geometry). The word "smooth" is a jargon word that implies sufficient differentiability for the question at hand. I think that it may be best to remove the clutter and stay more intuitive throughout the article, after an explicit warning that the meaning of the term "smooth" depends on the context. As for the general definition of the arc length, note that this section refers to the main article on arc length. A parametrized curve with compact domain of the parameter is rectifiable (i.e. has a well-defined arc length) if and only if the coordinate functions have bounded variation. In the context of differential geometry, which is the scope of this article, one should stick with smooth curves (once continuously differentiable suffices in this case), and then for such curves the arc length is indeed expressible by the given integral. Arcfrk (talk) 05:29, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Main theorem of curve theory[edit]
It is written in the article: Given n functions
then there exists a unique (up to transformations using the Euclidean group) Cn+1-curve γ which is regular of order n and has the following properties
where the set
is the Frenet frame for the curve.
I am wondering: would it be possible to provide a proof or a clear reference for it? I think this is important, all the more so that this is a fundamental theorem. Also, it would be probably interesting to give a pointer to an equivalent (generalization) of the functions and this characterization not only for curves, but for surfaces (which I do not know). Maybe the corresponding theorem can be detailed in the article about differential geometry of surfaces. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 16:13, 28 August 2011 (UTC) ambrym
Curve vs image of curve[edit]
A curve is defined as a function, and it is clarified that it is different than it's image.
But in the section "Reparametrization and equivalence relation" it says:
"Given the image of a curve one can define several different parameterizations of the curve"
the last word curve in that sentence, to which curve does it refer? it seems to refer to the image of the original curve instead.
Another problem I see is this one, suppose I define the unit circle in the usual way
Then C is a set (and thus not a curve), how does the concept of length of C relate to the length of a curve? Or the fact than one would like to call C regular because it has tangent lines, to the regular curve definition of this article. I think this relation (curve/image) should be clarified in some way. Maybe even change the definition of curve to it's image and call path to what is being called curve? (to have a name for the image)
Proposed merge from Користувач:Перевод[edit]
This translation from Ukrainian WP appears to contain significant new content, but as I'm not a mathematician I'm not best placed to help. Opinions from actual mathematicians please? OnionRing (talk) 20:06, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
- Significant new content, really? Where? Boris Tsirelson (talk) 11:01, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Section "The curvature of the curve"? I had nominated it for speedy db-a10, but then wondered if I was missing some content that could usefully be merged in. If not, then please feel free to speedy it a10 again. Thanks, OnionRing (talk) 11:21, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- We have curvature already, which has been forked off of this article, and includes everything that is there (and more). I have WP:PRODed the new article. Sławomir Biały (talk) 11:38, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Section "The curvature of the curve"? I had nominated it for speedy db-a10, but then wondered if I was missing some content that could usefully be merged in. If not, then please feel free to speedy it a10 again. Thanks, OnionRing (talk) 11:21, 27 May 2016 (UTC)


text:
Fact Sheet: Creating a Pond
Presenter: Stephen Ryan, 20/02/2010
SERIES 21 Episode 03
With ten years of drought Stephen's bog garden has become more of a desert than a bog, so he's decided to turn it into a pond. He's chosen an informal shape with different levels. A ledge around the edge will support plants that prefer a shallower depth to that of the main pond.
Stephen is keen to use some of the top soil from the area for planting and this is placed around the edges of the pond as it's dug. Stephen then lines the bottom, sides and ledges with tough butyl rubber, burying it under the soil around the edges to hold it in place.
To prevent the ledges from collapsing into the pond Stephen places dead tree-fern logs along them. He prefers logs to rocks for aesthetics and also as a potential anchor for the roots of the water plants.
There are two basic types of pond plants: Submersibles, which are those that need to be planted onto the deeper ledges and be completely submerged, and marginals, which grow in the boggy mud around the edge of the pond.
Before installing the marginal plants, Stephen places them all around the pond to "get a sense of what they're going to look like once they're planted."
Marginal plants Stephen's Using
- With their wonderful foliage and flowers, hostas are often used in pots or borders. To use as a marginal plant remember that they like moist soil and don't like to be really wet, so plant these right up on the pond edge.
- A particularly interesting plant is the North American Skunk Cabbage (Lysichiton americanus). The leaves on a mature plant will be about a metre tall and, in the winter, just as it's about to break into foliage, yellow Arum lily-like flowers will seemingly erupt out of the mud. Stephen says, "It's a really special plant."
- Besides the ornamentals, Stephen's also planting edible watercress and Vietnamese Mint for added interest.
With marginal plants, it's important to remember that they don't need a lot of root depth. This is because the roots don't have to search for moisture. So, if planting into shallow soil as Stephen is, it's fine to remove up to a third of the soil and roots before planting. This will allow the root ball to be covered effectively by the shallow soil around the pond.
Stephen says, "These plants are going to look fantastic and all I have to wait for now is some decent rains to fill the pond right up to the top."
Information contained in this fact sheet is a summary of material included in the program. If further information is required, please contact your local nursery or garden centre.
Copyright Restrictions: This fact sheet is for private and domestic information purposes only. It may not be copied, reproduced, sold or used for any other purpose without the express permission of the ABC.


text: Let me first off say I absolutely love my Captivate despite one issue I'm having with it. I'm not sure if anyone is experiencing the same issue, I tried plugging these troubleshooting keywords into Google and I'm not coming up with helpful information so I'm going to try posting here. I am using a stock version of 2.1, with root, Launcher Pro, Home Switcher, and the Active Kill app (although I tried removing Active Kill and I'm still getting the issue, so I guess it's irrelevant). Here's the issue I'm running across: 1) Press on/off button 2) Swipe finger to unlock screen 3) After phone is unlocked my phone keeps randomly toggling through all 3 of my desktops and won't stop unless I press the on/off button. 4) The Home button also flashes occasionally. This is also occurring randomly when I'm using the messaging application and K-9 Mail. Is anyone experiencing the same issue? Any solution or troubleshooting steps?


text:
GloboNote is a desktop note taking application. It helps you to create to-do lists, reminders, and other notes in one place. There is no limit in the number of sticky notes you can create. Notes can be organized by groups and searched using the search tool. You can format a note's text, change its color, font, size, and transparency level. You can make a note sticky by setting it to always stay on top, or hide or roll-up a note when not use. You can set alarms, play custom alarm sounds (WAV, MP3, AIFF, and AU), attach files, insert images, and more.
Extended Generic Pager provides pagination of data listings from arrays, CSV, or MySQL. It takes as parameters the total number of list entries, the limit of entries to display per page, and the number of the current page. It generates an HTML list with links to browse the listing pages, optionally with links to the previous, next, first, and last pages. The text labels and the CSS classes of the links are configurable.
pycms is a minimalist component-based Web Content Management System based on CherryPy. It has most of the goodies of Plone/Zope: Python instead of a PHP security mess, no MySQL can of worms, clean separation of code and content, and the ability to run nicely behind a Web server/cache/load balancer. In addition, it features plain text storage of all site contents and settings in JSON files, effortless theming, and a small memory footprint.
Ixonos MISP CIMD Simulator is a Computer Interface to Message Distribution (CIMD) protocol version 2.0-compliant server for developing and testing CIMD applications. It can be used out-of-the box for development, functional and load testing CIMD send-only and receiving applications. The simulator does not interface with a SMSC or MMSC. It has been designed to be simple, lightweight, and scalable, and can be easily extended for other use cases and purposes.
Atlassian Stash delivers a central, secure solution for creating and managing distributed Git repositories on your own servers. It has an easy-to-use interface for adding users and groups and creating and managing repositories, and a Project Structure for logically grouping your repositories. Installed on your own network, administrators have full control over how Stash fits into their environment. It supports Atlassian's plugin framework plus a full, open REST API for customized integrations. Key features include simple administration, easy permissions around Git repositories, LDAP (Active Directory) integration, JIRA issue tracker integration, cloning, and more.
A wireframes, mockup, and prototype tool for desktop, Web, and mobile applications.
A simple podcast aggregator.