What would be a good way to overcome bad experiences with a professor in my department, who is not my main advisor, but from whom I would like to get advice regularly?

During the first year of my PhD, I worked with the Professor in a class on a project that I didn’t perform well on (because I was not very interested in that particular project + I didn’t feel very confident on the topic by that time). Our relationship has cooled down since, and he was even debating whether or not to put me as a co-author on the paper that came out of the project with multiple students. (the authoring-issue is not part of this question; I mention it to describe the status of our relationship)

Now in my second year of my PhD, I realize that it would be quite valuable to have his advice on other projects that I work on, potentially even as a co-advisor, but I fear I messed up the relationship too badly.

What would be a good approach to overcome the bad/non-existing relationship? Or would that be a waste of time and I’d rather look for someone else, which could potentially even mean I need to change the focus of my PhD?

This is the form i recieved from arxiv.org.
I would really appreciate, if someone could help me with that by endorsing me.
Thanks a lot in advance!


Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 at 8:20 PM
From: help@arxiv.org
To: nikolaus.castell@mail.com
Subject: arXiv endorsement request from Nikolaus Castell-Castell
(Nikolaus Castell-Castell should forward this email to someone who’s
registered as an endorser for the cs.CL (Computation and Language)
subject class of arXiv.)

Nikolaus Castell-Castell requests your endorsement to submit an article
to the cs.CL section of arXiv. To tell us that you would (or would not)
like to endorse this person, please visit the following URL:


If that URL does not work for you, please visit


and enter the following six-digit alphanumeric string:

Endorsement Code: DIGLUQ

Note: The arXiv endorsement system has not previously been used in
Computer Science, but is being phased in between now and September 1,
2016. You will only need to seek endorsement once per subject area. If
you would prefer not to seek endorsement at this time, please reply to
this message (help@arXiv.org) asking for the endorsement requirement to
be temporarily waived. As of September 1, 2016 you will be required to
complete the regular endorsement process in order to submit. It is
important to begin your reply with “Dear arXiv” to ensure it passes our
spam filter. Note that due to the volume of requests, messages to
help@arXiv.org may take a few days to receive a response.

I have a personal subscription to a journal (J lin Endocronol Metab) and when I search for PDF attachments in EndNote it says “Not Found” because it’s linked to their PubMed URL instead of the direct link to the journal site for the PDF. This means I’ll have to manually upload every PDF, and I’ve got over a thousand citations to do it for.

Any ideas?

This question already has an answer here:

Recently, a friend of mine and I have co-authored a mathematics paper which mathematically models pressurized flow from a water tank. We are now thinking of getting our paper published. Both of us are high school students.

Could anybody please suggest any journals that accept papers by high school students? The journal need not be specifically aimed at high school students; we are looking for a journal which might accept a paper of our level (our paper involves mathematical modelling, calculus, fluid dynamics, and first order differential equations). The only names I know that we might be interested in are (in order of chances of acceptance):

  • “The College Mathematical Journal” published by the MAA
  • “East Asian Journal on Applied Mathematics” published by the Cambridge University Press
  • “Applied Mathematical Modelling” published by Elsevier
  • “The Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics” published by the Oxford University press
  • “Advances in Applied Mathematics and Mechanics” published by the Cambridge University Press
  • “The IMA Journal of Applied Mathematics” published by the Oxford University Press

I was told that one can apply to only one journal at a time. How true is this statement?

As many of you probably know, almost all advice regarding doing better academic talks includes universal advice to not put too many words in any one slide, and to not read straight from slides (this is always thought to be a sign of a bad talk).

I used to agree with all of this because it sounds reasonable, and anyway that’s how I’ve written my own talks so far. But I went to a conference late last year where a speaker did exactly the opposite of this advice (my field is mathematics). He was literally reading his slides verbatim, and each of his slides was packed full with long sentences. And yet, it was one of my favorite talks of the conference, and for me (a Ph.D student) it was clean, clear, and easy to follow despite the fact that the material was completely new to me. I do think a large part of the reason I found it so clean and clear was precisely because of the talk’s structure, and not despite of it.

That experience made me rethink my prejudice against speakers who read out of the slides. For some people, it may be a superior talk strategy to alternatives, especially in academic fields where the details really matter.

So, I am not convinced anymore that it is general (or even, usual) good advice to not read from the slides. Why do people think it’s such a bad idea? And please don’t say “it’s lazy” or “could just read the slides instead of listening to the talk” because in practice, neither of these perspectives demonstrate why an alternative is better at communicating the information, which is what really matters.

I am submitting a paper to a computer science conference, can I submit it without author list? The submission guideline says: “submissions are reviewed following a single blind review process, meaning, you do not need to hide authors’ names and affiliations”

The names, affiliations and conflicts of interests will be mentioned when I am submitting the paper. But can I remove name and affiliations from the paper (pdf)? Does it mean that the reviewer will not see it?

Secondly, is there any point in hiding these information, or they will find it out anyway?

I think that my findings are great in all senses since I started, and that was 2000.
I solved The Sorites Paradox back then, first go.
A bad ‘sports person’, basically, like a bad academic, threatened my life after realizing his research results were wrong to the bone, about 30 years of research.
I never found a way of recovering since then in terms of being reintegrated to the mainstream.
I don’t know what else to do: findings are spectacular, books are useful, but nothing has been working.
I have a huge Linkedin network only for academics, but they seem to all attack me somehow, like whoever does not help is attacking, in my humblest.
I did nothing wrong. I was simply brilliant all the way through.
I suffer atrocities never imagined possible before since end of 2001 because of an admin from VUT, a woman.
No authority on earth will ever do what they should and the press knows and does not publish. Only a banner held by witnesses and containing their witness’ note can save me: life show, real-time transmission.
Nobody wants to do that for some reason.
Please have mercy on me and help.
Six PhDs: four in record time without formal title, VC for research told me to call them all PhD by research, those ‘research experiences’, and two with formal title, IICSE.
One Master’s: Philosophy, IICSE.
One teaching degree: Licentiate in Mathematics
One accreditation to teach secondary, Maths: SA, AU
Plenty of experience in private tuition, more than 20 years
Some experience in schools and universities
Plenty of excellent endorsements on Linkedin, good ranking on Research Gate and Academia.edu, some excellent words about me on Tutor Finder, etc.
I write blogs with Blogger, unpaid work.
I have excellent research projects, extremely meaningful, some can be seen on Research Gate
Tried my Linkedin and not even one collaborator for a postdoc application after I found some funds online that I could apply for, USA, only God knows why.
Listed with IBC and Who’s Who Marquis
Specializations due to research results: paradoxes of language, logic, especially Classical, Real Analysis, Common Mathematical Fallacies, Small Worlds, and a few others
Pretty happy lecturing Real Analysis, Calculus I, Foundations, Logic, Introduction to Graph Theory, Small Worlds, Fallacies, and paradoxes of language
Preference is the USA for me to have a chance to fight for my basic human rights. All problems of my life come from Brazil, almost all from Rio, especially the atrocities I endure for more than 14 years now in First World Democracy.
There is only God so far, all authorities know and some are even responsible, such as Judith Cook from VUT, Equity branch.
Second to the banner comes the job, in terms of things that can be done to help me have a chance.
Findings are extraordinary: solution to The Sorites (2000), shape of S-convexity (2001), new model for human networks (2002), nonisothermal film blowing, mathematical model (2002), solution to The Liar, solution to the Russell’s Paradox, solution to the Hanging Paradox, solution to The Dichotomy, etc.
Please help, for God’s sake.
My research projects go from infinitely easy, like accessible to almost everyone in Academia, regardless of their specialization, to really difficult, so that there is always something you could be helping me with or accepting that I give you papers in exchange for the postdoc. I can give you part of my salary for one year after I get the academic job if you need.
Anima Est is probably the most interesting in terms of meaning for human kind, project: At this stage, we would need at least consultants that were from Medicine and Statistics. We would then perform laboratory experimentation with humans to measure energy expenditure, refine results, and further prove or disprove the existence of the human soul with basis on that and theories about human dreams.
Accessible to academics of all areas because they all will understand and master what is involved quite easily after studying my work.
Learning Accelerators, part of Teach for Freedom, is probably the second easiest in terms of access: We would need someone from Statistics to help plan the experiment. Two groups of students, one control. At most one month of teaching would already give results. If we could get someone from Psychometrics to act as a consultant together with the Statistician, that would bring best results. We would then measure all using Psychometrics: skills before and after being subjected to the method. A book should originate from this work. Results have already been tested in practice.
There is also Mother Tongue. This is a piece of Teach for Freedom. We would be further developing the theory you see on My Mother Tongue is Helping You.

I am starting to write a research article in computer science area. While writing, I am using very formal terminologies and sentences which occasionally get quite boring. Sometimes, funny side of my personality pops up, and I end up writing some informal sentences which I have to delete later, picturing a very serious looking reviewer reading my paper draft. I always have this idea that a research article should be narrated like a story (keeping the facts and assumptions valid) to make it interested for the readers and stories often get quite informal. Don’t they?

So the question is: How informal can I go in writing a research article even if my assumptions are correct? Do reviewers mind if the language used is not quite formal?