@drmunazzaspecialist3: 🌸 10 سال بعد ایک اور خوشی! الحمدللہ 🌸 سعودی عرب سے تشریف لانے والی مریضہ، جن کے پہلے بچے کی پیدائش کو 10 سال گزر چکے تھے، اللہ تعالیٰ نے انہیں دوبارہ اولاد کی نعمت سے نوازا۔ 🤲💖 یہ خوبصورت لمحہ یقیناً ایک ماں کے لیے بے حد خاص اور خوشی بھرا ہے۔ 🥰 اللہ تعالیٰ اس ننھی پری کو صحت، لمبی عمر اور نیک نصیب عطا فرمائے۔ آمین! 🤲✨ 👩‍⚕️ Dr. Munazza Usman Consultant Gynecologist & Obstetrician 📍 Azlan Medicare, 63-B People’s Colony No. 2, Faisalabad 📱 WhatsApp: 0321-6050407 | 0321-5650407 ☎️ PTCL: 041-2434963 #DrMunazzaUsman #AzlanMedicare #Faisalabad #Gynecologist #Obstetrician #PregnancyJourney #Motherhood #BlessedWithABaby #BabyBlessing #InfertilityAwareness #WomensHealth

Dr Munazza Usman
Dr Munazza Usman
Open In TikTok:
Region: PK
Wednesday 19 August 2026 15:00:00 GMT
6175
249
22
12

Music

Download

Comments

sandhu_zadi083
کُڑی سَندھُو جَٹاں دِی :
Yar ye Dr boht achi hn me b gyi hn inky pass boht polite or humble hn operation b inhi sy krwaya me ny
2026-08-19 15:46:56
1
s_sidoo
sidra shahzdii :
mashallah ma aj he conceive Kya hn Dr na bahut acha treatment dey one month ma conceive kar liye
2026-08-19 15:09:40
2
rabiarehman222
Dr Rabia Rehman :
looking so pretty❤️
2026-08-19 16:28:32
1
abhiarani786
🦋𝄟⃝ ReHmAnI✮⃝ KiNg𝄟⃝👑 :
mashallha Allah pak lambi Zindagi kra apki doctor g ameen sub ameen 🥰😘💞
2026-08-19 17:38:13
0
alonerajpoot2580
HAalonerajpoot :
Mashallah Dr munzaa bht achii ha Mera phalla c section idar hua tha ab 2nd b idar hi ho ga bht jaldii inshallah ap sab b zaror visit kry
2026-08-19 19:51:44
0
khadijaasghar11
Khadija Asghar :
Ameen sum Ameen ❤️
2026-08-19 15:34:03
1
rehanulhaq907
rehanulhaq907 :
kl meri Bari🥰🥰🥰
2026-08-19 15:01:57
2
syedaa.a.h
A.H official :
MashAllah
2026-08-19 15:24:18
1
malikhadimalikhad36
malikhadimalikhad36 :
yar mara an sa malna ko bohat Dil karta ha or taretmant be Lana chti ho lakin ma bohat dor ho or kabi Faslabad be ni gai as Lea mare rekwast ha doctor sab Lahor ma be Aya Kara plz hafta ma AK den
2026-08-19 18:18:26
0
angel_by_heart44
𝒬𝓊𝑒𝑒𝓃 𝒪𝒻 𝒮𝒽𝒶𝒹𝑜𝓌🖤 :
Mashallah ❤️
2026-08-19 15:56:01
1
shahzadshairdill
*M.Shahzad Shair Dill* :
Mashallah. Dr munaza Usman Bhot achi Dr Hain.
2026-08-19 18:34:08
0
rehanulhaq907
rehanulhaq907 :
NYC doctor [lovely]
2026-08-19 15:02:12
1
s_sidoo
sidra shahzdii :
mashallah 😘
2026-08-19 15:08:08
1
sandhu_zadi083
کُڑی سَندھُو جَٹاں دِی :
MashaAllah 💞
2026-08-19 15:46:02
1
zasheenkhf
zasheenkhf :
🥰🥰🥰
2026-08-19 16:24:37
1
user92516236sssssss
Jan Jan ss :
👍👍
2026-08-19 17:38:40
0
shazdaaahamas
Rajpoot Hamas shazdaaa :
🥰🥰🥰
2026-08-19 15:49:27
0
ahsanraza5087
AhSaN RaZa🪽 :
❤️❤️❤️
2026-08-19 17:50:51
0
To see more videos from user @drmunazzaspecialist3, please go to the Tikwm homepage.

Other Videos

Graham's number is an immense number that arose as an upper bound on the answer of a problem in the mathematical field of Ramsey theory. It is much larger than many other large numbers introduced as effective bounds in mathematics, such as Skewes's bound, which in turn is much larger than a googolplex. Graham's number is so large that the observable universe is far too small to contain its ordinary digital representation, assuming that each digit occupies one Planck volume. But even the number of digits in this digital representation of Graham's number would itself be a number so large that its digital representation cannot be represented in the observable universe. Nor even can the number of digits of that number—and so forth, for a number of times far exceeding the total number of Planck volumes in the observable universe. Thus, Graham's number cannot be expressed even by physical universe-scale power towers of the form  a b c ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ {\displaystyle a^{b^{c^{\cdot ^{\cdot ^{\cdot }}}}}}, even though Graham's number is indeed a power of three. However, Graham's number can be explicitly given by computable recursive formulas using Knuth's up-arrow notation or equivalent, as was done by Ronald Graham, the number's namesake. As there is a recursive formula to define it, it is much smaller than typical busy beaver numbers, the sequence of which grows faster than any computable sequence. Though too large to ever be computed in full, the sequence of digits of Graham's number can be computed explicitly via simple algorithms; the last 10 digits of Graham's number are ...2464195387.[1] Using Knuth's up-arrow notation, Graham's number is  g 64 {\displaystyle g_{64}},[2] where g n = { 3 ↑↑↑↑ 3 , if  n = 1  and 3 ↑ g n − 1 3 , if  n ≥ 2. {\displaystyle g_{n}={\begin{cases}3\uparrow \uparrow \uparrow \uparrow 3,&{\text{if }}n=1{\text{ and}}\\3\uparrow ^{g_{n-1}}3,&{\text{if }}n\geq 2.\end{cases}}} Graham's number was used by Graham in conversations with popular science writer Martin Gardner as a simplified explanation of the upper bounds of the problem he was working on. In 1977, Gardner described the number in Scientific American, introducing it to the general public. At the time of its introduction, it was the largest specific positive integer ever to have been used in a published mathematical proof. The number was described in the 1980 Guinness Book of World Records, adding to its popular interest. Other specific integers (such as TREE(3)) known to be far larger than Graham's number have since appeared in many serious mathematical proofs, for example in connection with Harvey Friedman's various finite forms of Kruskal's theorem. Additionally, smaller upper bounds on the Ramsey theory problem from which Graham's number was derived have since been proven to be valid. #курапов #creatorsearchinsights #fyp #залети #рекомендации
Graham's number is an immense number that arose as an upper bound on the answer of a problem in the mathematical field of Ramsey theory. It is much larger than many other large numbers introduced as effective bounds in mathematics, such as Skewes's bound, which in turn is much larger than a googolplex. Graham's number is so large that the observable universe is far too small to contain its ordinary digital representation, assuming that each digit occupies one Planck volume. But even the number of digits in this digital representation of Graham's number would itself be a number so large that its digital representation cannot be represented in the observable universe. Nor even can the number of digits of that number—and so forth, for a number of times far exceeding the total number of Planck volumes in the observable universe. Thus, Graham's number cannot be expressed even by physical universe-scale power towers of the form a b c ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ {\displaystyle a^{b^{c^{\cdot ^{\cdot ^{\cdot }}}}}}, even though Graham's number is indeed a power of three. However, Graham's number can be explicitly given by computable recursive formulas using Knuth's up-arrow notation or equivalent, as was done by Ronald Graham, the number's namesake. As there is a recursive formula to define it, it is much smaller than typical busy beaver numbers, the sequence of which grows faster than any computable sequence. Though too large to ever be computed in full, the sequence of digits of Graham's number can be computed explicitly via simple algorithms; the last 10 digits of Graham's number are ...2464195387.[1] Using Knuth's up-arrow notation, Graham's number is g 64 {\displaystyle g_{64}},[2] where g n = { 3 ↑↑↑↑ 3 , if n = 1 and 3 ↑ g n − 1 3 , if n ≥ 2. {\displaystyle g_{n}={\begin{cases}3\uparrow \uparrow \uparrow \uparrow 3,&{\text{if }}n=1{\text{ and}}\\3\uparrow ^{g_{n-1}}3,&{\text{if }}n\geq 2.\end{cases}}} Graham's number was used by Graham in conversations with popular science writer Martin Gardner as a simplified explanation of the upper bounds of the problem he was working on. In 1977, Gardner described the number in Scientific American, introducing it to the general public. At the time of its introduction, it was the largest specific positive integer ever to have been used in a published mathematical proof. The number was described in the 1980 Guinness Book of World Records, adding to its popular interest. Other specific integers (such as TREE(3)) known to be far larger than Graham's number have since appeared in many serious mathematical proofs, for example in connection with Harvey Friedman's various finite forms of Kruskal's theorem. Additionally, smaller upper bounds on the Ramsey theory problem from which Graham's number was derived have since been proven to be valid. #курапов #creatorsearchinsights #fyp #залети #рекомендации

About