Fair Treatment as a PhD Graduate: My Experience in Michigan and India

[causalset]

I have recently got my ph.d. (last May) in Michigan and right now I am doing postdoc in India. But, even though the situation that I am about to describe is few years in the past, I would still like your take as to whether you think I been treated farly or not. In order to present accurate picture the story is quite long so this forum doesn't allow that size of a post. For that reason I will simply refer you to another forum where I made the same post, and then you can come back here and respond.

Here it is: http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt106767.html

 

[Count Iblis]

The mistake you made (which I managed to avoid) was that you took the rules too seriously in the beginning and later you found out that perhaps you should have done things differently.

A talented person like you who was years ahead in math and physics at an early age should have been far more arrogant when it comes to sticking to stupid rules they have at school/university. You should have studied far more on your own and made your own plans and then bypassed any inconvenient rules at university by contacting the professors personally.

You should have started to work on research projects (your own private projects or in collaboration with professors) when you were still at undergraduate level or even when you were at high school. Passing exams and doing what all other students do is not important at all. Because that is the curriculum for the average students, and you were way ahead of them.

 

[Unit]

A talented person like you who was years ahead in math and physics at an early age should have been far more arrogant when it comes to sticking to stupid rules they have at school/university. You should have studied far more on your own and made your own plans and then bypassed any inconvenient rules at university by contacting the professors personally.

You should have started to work on research projects (your own private projects or in collaboration with professors) when you were still at undergraduate level or even when you were at high school. Passing exams and doing what all other students do is not important at all. Because that is the curriculum for the average students, and you were way ahead of them.

I completely agree.
Also, I think this is the most brilliant advice I have ever heard, so thank you, Count Iblis

 

[mal4mac]

Your mistake (?) was trying to rewrite string theory when you were not "supposed to"! The "powers that be" require you to play the game their way. You cannot go back and reinvent string theory if you are expected to use string theory. Check out Smolin's "The Trouble with Physics", it might give you some ideas of how you can get to a place where you can invent things, rather than just follow the party line.

 

[TMFKAN64]

If I may summarize your original post, you refused to listen to anyone who has ever given you advice as you stumbled from school to school alienating people with your childish behavior as you went your own way.

You are *very* lucky that you met so many *very* patient people on your way.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Were you treated fairly? No...and you should be thankful. If you were treated fairly, you would have gotten many fewer opportunities that you did.

I think TMFKAN64 hit it on the head: "you refused to listen to anyone who has ever given you advice" - and somehow your refusal to listen was their fault.

 

[shoehorn]

I have recently got my ph.d. (last May) in Michigan and right now I am doing postdoc in India. But, even though the situation that I am about to describe is few years in the past, I would still like your take as to whether you think I been treated farly or not. In order to present accurate picture the story is quite long so this forum doesn't allow that size of a post. For that reason I will simply refer you to another forum where I made the same post, and then you can come back here and respond.

Here it is: http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt106767.html

Utter nonsense, and as others have said, you were lucky that people put up with you for so long. The facts of the matter seems to be that you completely lack any focus, you've enormously overestimated your own abilities, and, unforgivably, you lack the ability to follow simple instructions given to you by the people upon whose good will you depend. This is a recipe for disaster in life, let alone for someone in the vulnerable position of a Ph.D. student.

By the way, there are several claims in that post which are at best unwise and at worst libellous. You'd be well advised to take the post down.

 

[cristo]

I read your convoluted story. The thing that stuck out for me was your lack of dedication to your degree shown by the fact that you essentially took a summer off by moving half way across the country. You can't do that an expect to succeed in graduate school!

 

[Vanadium 50]

I read your convoluted story. The thing that stuck out for me was your lack of dedication to your degree shown by the fact that you essentially took a summer off by moving half way across the country. You can't do that an expect to succeed in graduate school!

Hi Cristo,

While I hear what you are saying, I have seen this work. (In fact, the person I am thinking of who did it ended up being a professor at an Ivy for a decade, before he returned to Canada). The secret is that the student and professor have to be on the same page as to exactly what will and will not get done over the summer.

Where the OP went awry is that he talked to his advisor once at the beginning of summer about what was expected, then went to California and didn't do it, and now somehow this is the professor's fault. What amazes me is that the OP didn't stay in touch while he was in California: there are things called telephones and e-mail which work remarkably well. Much better than the carrier pigeons and smoke signals we had to use when I was in graduate school. Had he chosen to, he could have been productive. Another opportunity squandered.

One other comment, that extends to the OP's assessment of his own abilities. Getting a PhD does not mean one is a successful researcher. Many, many PhD's are ultimately unsuccessful at it. A check on the arXiv shows his thesis, one set of conference proceedings, 7 papers sent only to the arXiv, not published in a journal, and 1 paper published with your advisor as co-author. Of them, the only citations are for that paper. The 7 preprints only cite each other. This is hardly indicative of a successful career.

Indeed, the paper that has citations, has 12, and of them, 7 are also the OP citing his own work. So essentially, he has one paper, and it falls into the "less known" category. Six months after I graduated, I had 5 papers with (at the time) 16 external citations (since then, there have been about 200 citations of those papers). I think this is far more typical of a successful research program.

 

[cristo]

Where the OP went awry is that he talked to his advisor once at the beginning of summer about what was expected, then went to California and didn't do it, and now somehow this is the professor's fault.

I agree, perhaps I should have been more clear. Like you say, it's not so much the fact that he moved away but that he didn't keep in contact. Had he kept in regular contact, it wouldn't really matter where in the world he was (things like Skype exist nowadays, which make long distance collaborations a lot simpler), but the fact that he didn't keep in touch shows that he treated his trip away as a holiday.

A check on the arXiv shows his thesis, one set of conference proceedings, 7 papers sent only to the arXiv, not published in a journal, and 1 paper published with your advisor as co-author. Of them, the only citations are for that paper. The 7 preprints only cite each other. This is hardly indicative of a successful career.

This might be a little harsh. I get the gist of what you're saying, but I also don't think there are too many groups around the world working on causal set theory.

 

[Vanadium 50]

This might be a little harsh. I get the gist of what you're saying, but I also don't think there are too many groups around the world working on causal set theory.

Perhaps, but at a minimum it means that the groups that are working on it are not heavily citing him. There is a "big fish in a small pond" effect, but even if you are in a small pond, you need to be clearly identifiable as a fish.

It wasn't really what I was trying to get at, though. The point I was trying to make is that getting a PhD does not automatically make one a successful researcher. Again, looking back at my own career, it was a good 15 years after the PhD before I was starting to really become successful - defined as people starting to care about my opinion.

 

[Count Iblis]

Utter nonsense, and as others have said, you were lucky that people put up with you for so long. The facts of the matter seems to be that you completely lack any focus, you've enormously overestimated your own abilities, and, unforgivably, you lack the ability to follow simple instructions given to you by the people upon whose good will you depend. This is a recipe for disaster in life, let alone for someone in the vulnerable position of a Ph.D. student.

By the way, there are several claims in that post which are at best unwise and at worst libellous. You'd be well advised to take the post down.

I completely disagree. I'm assuming that the factual statements what he wrote on his website are more or less correct. Then I think, from my own experience and that of some of my friends, that the reason why things didn't work out well for him has far more to do with a lack of experience of having to work/study a lot.

If you are very far ahead in school from an early age on, you don't go to school to laearn anything. You don't have to do much at all to score perfect A's. You then may evolve into someone who lacks focus, who cannot motivate himself to work study hard. The solution, though, is not really to try to behave as others do, that would simply not work. I think I was lucky when was in high school, because I was working on my own projects and I was studying quite hard at home from university level books.

Then, when I went to universiy, I was lucky to live in Europe and not in the US. In Europe you can make your own plans on which lectures to follws which problem sessions to attend and in which subjects to do exams. Of course, you have to do exams in a certain number of subjects as a bare minimum per year, but apart from that, it is up to you what else you do.

Another advantage over the US system is that at the undergraduate level you get more advanced subjects. So, e.g. you have pass quantum field theory as applied to particcle physics or as applied to condensed matter physics to get your university diploma.

So, someone who is far ahead when he arrives at university will typically have to learn to study hard if he isn't used to that. And he will have some time to learn that. If the more advanced subjects were only given when you start your Ph.D., then that could indeed be disaster for people who from the age of 6 onwards never have learned to study hard.

Although the system we have in Europe is better for these sort of people, it is not perfect and I have seen some fail. One of my friends who was unquestionablly very talented at math (he had attended the International Math Olympiad), dropped out in the first year at university. He failed to pass a single physics exam. And I have heard about a similar case from my father. A son of his colleague dropped out, also because he failed to pas a single physics exam, even though he passed high school with 100% scores in all subject.

But this is not really a surprise, given that right when you enter the first year at univerity, you may have to study seriously for the first time of your life.

Then, some other of my friends who were of above average ability who did well, mostly were students who, like me, were studying from university level books or working on their own projects when at high school.

So, the fundamental problem is that to be successful, you have to work/study hard, no matter how intelligent you are. But the educational system does not lead people like him to learn how to work/study hard. They basically get spoiled by the system that is tuned to the abilities of the average student.

 

[TMFKAN64]

Maybe it's just me, but the OP's story doesn't seem like that of an intellectual giant towering over his peers. It's the story of an average Ph.D. student who *thinks* he is an intellectual giant towering over his peers.

It's all well and good to try to get ahead of the usual academic pace, but when you find it isn't working, back off. When people try to give you useful advice, listen to them.

 

[Tobias Funke]

It seems like you just don't like physics. I started with this but I fundamentally disagree...then I went to this and didn't agree with such and such...and then this but I didn't like this axiom, etc.

Also, were you physically holding your advisor in his office? After spitting on the floor, threatening Chinese and black students and blaming it on Aspergers, or however you spell it? I would send you to a psych ward to be honest.

 

[Count Iblis]

Maybe it's just me, but the OP's story doesn't seem like that of an intellectual giant towering over his peers. It's the story of an average Ph.D. student who *thinks* he is an intellectual giant towering over his peers.

It's all well and good to try to get ahead of the usual academic pace, but when you find it isn't working, back off. When people try to give you useful advice, listen to them.

Well, by the time he was a Ph.D student, he had already messed up. It wasn't that he tried to get ahead of the "academic pace", he didn't try to do that. That was his real mistake.

 

[causalset]

The facts of the matter seems to be that you completely lack any focus

I can also provide FACTS when I don't lack focus:

1) I never lack focus when it comes to courses. Thats why I said that my earliest mistake was that I thought it was about courses not research.

2) Back in high school when I did my independent studies of math and physics ahead of time, I didn't lack focus either. The reason I have to go back to high school to look for that example is that ever since college I was taking as many courses as I possibly could so I didn't have time to study anything independently.

3) Ever since I started working on causal sets (starting from Fall 2006 all the way till now) I didn't lack focus either

So, because of these, I believe it is the axioms that made me lack focus.

To convince you, let's forget about causal sets, string theory, or supersymmetry, and talk about NEUTRAL TERITORY topics, i.e. topics I NEVER had to do research on. One such topic is an area of mathematics known as "category theory". I know that *IF* I were working in math department and chose that specific area of math as my thesis topic, I would be staring at the same page for months and months, and give an impression I completely lack focus. At the same time, I also know that if I do anything else in math, I will be super fast and impress everyone on how smart I am.

Now, you don't have to worry about me when it comes to category theory because I know to avoid it like a plague. But I couldn't perswade myself to similarly avoid string theory because it is "theory of everything" and it is so promissing and blah blah blah. So THAT was my mistake, that I INSISTED on doing it despite KNOWING I won't do it well.

you've enormously overestimated your own abilities

But you see, my MOTIVATION for overestimating my abilities was a good one: I thought I was being a GOOD student for doing it. Now, I know it shows a bad JUDGEMENT, but that has nothing to do with not taking school seriuosly. If I don't like a subject and don't want to do it (such as some of the breadth requirenment humanity courses I had in college) I would under-estimate my abilities and take upon as easy task as I possibly can. On the other hand, if I really take seriously a given subject (such as physics -- I wanted to be a physicist since I was 9 year old) THEN I will over-estimate my abilities.

Now here is an especially interesting question. Suppose topic X is easy, and topic Y is hard. Suppose we have two students, A and B, and they have identical skills: both can do X, and both can NOT do Y. Now, while these students have IDENTICAL skills, they have different JUDGEMENTS: student A took upon himself task X, while student B took upon himself task Y. Now, based on the identical skills the two students have as well as difficulties of the tasks as described, you can predict that student A succeeds and student B fails.

So, because student B failed, he is being told that "he has no future in theoretical physics". But that is wrong: student B can do the task X just as well as student A does. Then student B says "I made a mistake that I took upon myself task Y; here, I changed my mind, give me task X and I will do it just fine". In response, he is being told "It is my judgement that you don't have skills to do physics, whether it be task X or task Y". Now, that statement is wrong, since he had just as much skills to do task X as student A had. Yet, even though we know it is wrong, we can predict that that is EXACTLY what student B will be told!

simple instructions given to you by the people upon whose good will you depend

Are you referring to simple instructions to do research problem, or simple instructions regarding university policy. I would be very surprised if you mean the former; I mean it is not high school so why WOULD they give me simple instructions to solve a problem?

I read your convoluted story. The thing that stuck out for me was your lack of dedication to your degree shown by the fact that you essentially took a summer off by moving half way across the country. You can't do that an expect to succeed in graduate school!

First of all I must mention that it took a lot of fight with my mom to be able to go to Michigan for PART of the summer, which I did. THe reason is that my mom thinks of me as a little kid, so she believes that when I am in California I magically do better, and when I am away from her I magically do worse. SHE IS WRONG. So that is another example of people mis-evaluating me.

Now, back to what you were talking about, I was working just as much as I do when I was in Michigan; the problem was NOT that I took time off but that I worked on a wrong thing. So if I am supposed to run North and instead I run West, I will never win a race, no matter how fast I run.

Now, regarding the business with callihg my advisor. The reason I didn't call is that I THOUGHT I understood an assignment, and I THOUGHT the assignment simply happened to be difficult. If such is the case I shoudln't be calling him, after all the whole point is to see if I can do it myself.

*BUT* later it turned out that assignemtn wasn't THAT difficult; I simply misunderstood what it was. BUt I didn't know I misunderstood it until after I came back. Now, if I were in Michigan I would have had regular schedule of seeing him. So, regardless of whether I had anything to ask or not, I would have simply shown up in his office because it is Monday 10 AM, and then as conversation goes he would have seen I misunderstood an assignemnt and would have corrected me.

But when I was in California we didn't set up phone call schedule, and that is why I felt too awkward to call him to ask for help, since I THOUGHT I needed help. If I knew I misunderstood assignment I would have definitely called.

One other comment, that extends to the OP's assessment of his own abilities. Getting a PhD does not mean one is a successful researcher. Many, many PhD's are ultimately unsuccessful at it. A check on the arXiv shows his thesis, one set of conference proceedings, 7 papers sent only to the arXiv, not published in a journal, and 1 paper published with your advisor as co-author. Of them, the only citations are for that paper. The 7 preprints only cite each other. This is hardly indicative of a successful career.

1) THe reason other publications are not in a journal is simply that I never bothered submitting them. That is for two reasons:

a) I don't know the procedures of submitting things to journals. The one that was submitted was submitted by Bombelli, NOT me (even though the work is mine had he was mostly doing editting). That has nothing to do with physics; it is my attitude in general that if I never done something I don't do it. For example, I never learned how to use FAX, or scanner, or a number of other things. It took A LOT of pressure from my girlfriend to make me put video cam on computer so I can chat with her. If she didn't push me for TWO MONTHS to do it, I wuold have never done it because it seems "impossible". Same goes for publications: I never physically submitted anything to journal so it seems "impossible" to do it.

b) I am originally from Russia (I came to USA when I was 14) so English is my second language. Besides, even if I did have good English, the professional writing style is not the same as ordinary writing style. So I am mostly worried that my style doesn't sound professional which is why I wouldn't WANT to submit it to journal even if I could, unless someoen else does severe editting. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PHYSICS. As far as the mutual publication with Bombelli, all the calculations and physics content is MINE. But once Bombelli worked on it, MAGICALLY style became much more professional. I don't have anythign specific to point to (if I did, I would be able to do it myself) but I can just tell that. So I was pushing him for a long time to do similar editting work on the other papers, but he procrastinated. THe reason he procrastinated is probably because we agreed that he edits ALL of them in exchange of my letting him put his name on ONE of them. So since he already p8ublished the one on which we agreed he will put his name, he is far less motivated to do the rest.

2) As far as lack of citations go, I suspect it has to do with my style (see 1b). I mean, think about it: our mutual publication involves scalar field and gravity. My own publicvations involve gauge and fermionic fields. So the topics are similar: introducing the fields and Lagrangians onto causal sets. So if topics are similar, how come one has citations and the others don't? Probably because of style. And that is not surprising since Bombelli put A LOT of work on editting the mutual paper we have but not the rest.

Anyway, you don't have to trust me. I presume you know physics, so how about you just read all of my papers and tell me what you think on them?

Personally I feel they HAVE to be important for causal sets since no one before me (with exception of Johnston who did hte propagators -- NOT Lagrangian -- of spin 0 field on causal set) introduced matter into causal sets, so this is a step forward. Bombelli agrees with me on this one -- after my defense Dolgochev told me that I "moved an area of physics forward". Now, Dolgochev is a guy who openly tells me he is not in the field and doesn't have an opinion. So he must have heard it from Bombelli when they were discussing me.

But again, how about you simply read these papers and tell me what you think.

3) As far as your observation that the one paper that made it in journal had my advisor name, like I said I was the one who did all the content; Bombelli simply editted English for me, and he wanted me to put his name there as a condition for him doing the editting since editting took a lot of time off of his own work.

It seems like you just don't like physics. I started with this but I fundamentally disagree...then I went to this and didn't agree with such and such...and then this but I didn't like this axiom, etc.

As I said, I can go to neutral territory, which is math, and PREDICT I won't do well in category theory because "I don't like its axioms" and I WILL do well in everything else. THe mistake that I made is that I didn't treat string theory the way I would of treated category theory (which would be avoiding it entirely), because string theory is advertized too well so I felt compelled to do it.

Also, were you physically holding your advisor in his office?

NO! I neither physically touched him, nor did I insult him either. I simply kept going on and on how he should give me another chance. He was simply scared that when he kept telling me he didn't have time to talk any more I kept talking. Also, my voice is normally loud (which is NOT on purpose -- I am used to hearing myself speak loud so I don't even notice it) and it naturally gets louder when I try to perswade someone of something (even if I talk about physics problem it will likewise be loud) so that is probably what scard him.

After spitting on the floor, threatening Chinese and black students and blaming it on Aspergers

The spitting on the floor + Chineeze + black students incident happened on Dec 16; keeping Wells in the office happened on Jan 23. The reason the two were talked about simultaneously si that I had to come on Jan 26 to talk about Dec 16, and by that time they ALREADY HEARD about Jan 23 as well.

 

[Count Iblis]

I am originally from Russia (I came to USA when I was 14) so English is my second language. Besides, even if I did have good English, the professional writing style is not the same as ordinary writing style. So I am mostly worried that my style doesn't sound professional which is why I wouldn't WANT to submit it to journal even if I could, unless someoen else does severe editting.

You don't have to worry about that. I have a few times received Referee reports full of grammatical and spelling errors that said that my article was well written, that it contained very interesting results and that it should be published. The last time that happened, I was actually worried about some uncorrected language mistakes in my submitted article, I thought these errors could make a bad impression.

 

[Xnn]

This post as well as that on the Wrong Planet are just ones persons view of what actually happened. To fairly judge the situation would require input from the other people involved. So, it's not possible at this time to determine who was right or wrong in the various situation(s).

On the other hand, if you have Asperger syndrome then it is likely that significant non-verbal communications were simply missed while you displayed a general lack of empathy. This makes it difficult for all levels of friendship to develop along with the varied benefits.

Going forward, it'd be best to work on nurturing many friends (at home, school and work) as opposed to obsessing on the past.

 

[atyy]

It sounds like you were by and large lucky. The only thing that seems less than ideal is sometimes you had to do research under tight deadlines, and really imaginative, ground breaking work usually takes time. However, I am not one of those people who say we should fund all self-professed "visionaries". Undoubtedly the funding mechanisms will miss some real visionaries - but for good reason - the funding bodies do have a responsibility to the public, and must justify their expenses on current understanding. If visionary work could be justified on current understanding, it wouldn't be visionary! This is oversimplification, since there really is a gradation of work from mundane to visionary, not a phase transition. Anyway, I'm glad you got your work out on causal sets. I'm a biologist and not qualified to comment on your work, but as a lay person, the approach is philosophically appealing to me, and I wish you all the best in helping us understand how far that approach can go.

 

[Vanadium 50]

First of all, a bigot with Asperger's is just that: a bigot with Asperger's. There is simply no excuse to say deliberately hurtful things to people, particularly about their skin color or ethnic group.

Second, the idea that you, as an immigrant, get to tell other people that they don't belong in the US is hypocritical.

Next, it's clear form your recent posts that you don't really want other people's opinions on whether you were treated fairly - instead, you want our validation of your belief that despite getting multiple second chances (I count at least six), you were treated unfairly.

Next, your excuse that the reason that you haven't submitted you work to journals is that nobody told you the exact procedure is at odds with your claim to be a successful researcher. One point - indeed, the point of graduate school is for you, on your own, to figure out what you need to know, and then to go learn it. You're not in grammar school any more.

Then, your directive to "just read all of my papers and tell me what you think on them?" shows a profound misunderstanding of the process and a deep disresepct of your readers' time. If you don't think these papers are worth enough of your time and effort for you to get them into a journal, why do think that it's worth my time to read them? Exactly how much less valuable do you think my time is than yours is? Then multiply this by a large number of readers.

I was the one who did all the content; Bombelli simply editted English for me, and he wanted me to put his name there as a condition for him doing the editting since editting took a lot of time off of his own work.

So now you're accusing Luca Bombelli of scientific misconduct?

That's a very serious charge. Have you brought it to the journal?

 

[shoehorn]

There is also the (admittedly rather impolitic) point that nobody ends up doing a postdoc in India after grad school unless they deserve it.

 

[Dale]

Regardless whether or not you were treated fairly, the fact that you even asked the question is a sign of immaturity.

 

[Gasparri]

The mistake you made (which I managed to avoid) was that you took the rules too seriously in the beginning and later you found out that perhaps you should have done things differently.

A talented person like you who was years ahead in math and physics at an early age should have been far more arrogant when it comes to sticking to stupid rules they have at school/university. You should have studied far more on your own and made your own plans and then bypassed any inconvenient rules at university by contacting the professors personally.

You should have started to work on research projects (your own private projects or in collaboration with professors) when you were still at undergraduate level or even when you were at high school. Passing exams and doing what all other students do is not important at all. Because that is the curriculum for the average students, and you were way ahead of them.

Brilliant. I salute that flag.

 

[Pyrrhus]

I am in Grad School, and I am shocked from your post... You did just about everything wrong as a graduate student: You sounded arrogant to your professors, you did what you want to do, you couldn't follow even easy instructions, had to overcomplicate (Generalize...), you "insulted" other students and "scared" one of your professors... However, the part that is puzzling to me the most, you never even bothered to sit down with your advisors and ask the right questions instead of "hiding yourself" until the deadline is close.

You're lucky, most professors were actually PATIENT and NICE with you.

 

[Vanadium 50]

You're lucky, most professors were actually PATIENT and NICE with you.

I agree, but I am disturbed by causalset's accusation of scientific misconduct against his advisor, Luca Bombelli. That's very serious - the sort of thing that can end a career. Justifiably.

Of course, false accusations of scientific misconduct are also the sort of things that can end a career. Again, justifiably.

 

[causalset]

I agree, but I am disturbed by causalset's accusation of scientific misconduct against his advisor, Luca Bombelli. That's very serious - the sort of thing that can end a career. Justifiably.

Of course, false accusations of scientific misconduct are also the sort of things that can end a career. Again, justifiably.

I am NOT making any accusation against Bombelli:

1) We didn't agree on a DATE by which he does it

2) There were no signatures of agreements between me and him

3) He DID edit ALL the papers; he just didn't do as much work on them, which is SUBJECTIVE, not objective

HERE IS A THING:you asked me why *I* don't have publication, so I was giving a reason for this. If the reason was that I typed up a paper and then a cat ran across a key board and ruined my computer so I lost it, I would say that. This would NOT be an accusation against a cat, that would just be explaining myself. Same here. If it soudns like accusation then I AM SORRY.

I really don't want to accuse Bombelli because, if anything, I am greatful that he SAVED my career, otherwise if I didn't find him I would be working on car safety with Ross.

 

[causalset]

First of all, a bigot with Asperger's is just that: a bigot with Asperger's. There is simply no excuse to say deliberately hurtful things to people, particularly about their skin color or ethnic group.

Second, the idea that you, as an immigrant, get to tell other people that they don't belong in the US is hypocritical.

I am not racist: Prof Liu (the one I had Fall 2004 -- Summer 2005) was Chineeze. Likewise, Prof Tomazawa (the one I had Feb -- March 2005) was Japaneeze.

The problem is that due to Asperger I can't control myself, so when I lose control I look for ANYTHING nasty I can say. If the student was American of European descent, I am sure I would have found something else.

It is not anything calculated. I simply lose control of myself, and I fully intend to learn not to.

Next, it's clear form your recent posts that you don't really want other people's opinions on whether you were treated fairly - instead, you want our validation of your belief that despite getting multiple second chances (I count at least six), you were treated unfairly.

No, I want a discussion that adresses BOTH sides of the coin; I present my side, you present theirs. It is typically very hard to get ppl to do it since they won't have patience to follow my long story. You guys did, so it is an apportunity for me to go ahead and discuss it with you.

Next, your excuse that the reason that you haven't submitted you work to journals is that nobody told you the exact procedure is at odds with your claim to be a successful researcher. One point - indeed, the point of graduate school is for you, on your own, to figure out what you need to know, and then to go learn it. You're not in grammar school any more.

Yeah, but this part has nothing to do with physics.

Then, your directive to "just read all of my papers and tell me what you think on them?" shows a profound misunderstanding of the process and a deep disresepct of your readers' time. If you don't think these papers are worth enough of your time and effort for you to get them into a journal, why do think that it's worth my time to read them? Exactly how much less valuable do you think my time is than yours is? Then multiply this by a large number of readers.

First of all, I never DEMANDED anyone reads them. I said if you WANT to you CAN. The reason I say it is that it just felt weird when we were talking about the quality of material in these papers based on things other than their content, given that the person whom I was talking to knows physics. But again, i am not forcing anyone to read anything.

Regarding your other comment that if I don't take time to put it on a journal it means others shouldn't take time to read it ... if that is true, won't it imply that most ppl don't read arxiv work? If so, why is arxiv there?

May be you are right, and I simply don't konw the way the science works, THAT IS POSSIBLE. But still if I thought something wrong I did so because I misunderstood, not because I deliberately twisted it htat way.

So now you're accusing Luca Bombelli of scientific misconduct?

That's a very serious charge. Have you brought it to the journal?

That is definitely not intentional! My attitude towards Bombelli is positive one, so why would I want to accuse him? ALL I did was explaining why *I* didn't do something; if the reason is cat running across my keyboard, I would say it is a cat, and I won't be accusing cat. THATS THE WAY I THOUGHT OF IT. Now if it SOUNDED like I accused him of misconduct, IT WASN"T MY INTENTION.

 

[Pyrrhus]

I really don't want to accuse Bombelli because, if anything, I am greatful that he SAVED my career, otherwise if I didn't find him I would be working on car safety with Ross.

Perhaps, but you have to remember Ross put himself on the line to save your education (PhD). It was because of PATIENT and NICE professors that you were able to get your PhD. Even thought, you put several of those professors "against a wall" many times by not doing what you were assigned to do, asking for their help and not following them, not admitting you don't understand,...

 

[causalset]

Okay regarding the scientific misconduct business... BEFORE I agreed to put his name there I had long discussion with my mom, where she based on several sources told me it is OCMMON PRACTICE for an advisor to put the name on the paper the student writes. ONLY WITH THAT UNDERSTANDING I AGREED he puts his name. So I am NOT accusing him. If I did, I won't have agreed to do that.

He didn't FORCE me to put his name there. He gave me a choice, either he puts his name ther and does editting or I only have my name there and there is no editting. He was fine both ways. He also explained the reason: he was NOT manipulating me to put his name. Rather, he is very busy with his own work; so if something takes up time from his own work, there has to be compensation for that time. That is fair enough.

Again, if I thought of it as misconduct I won't have agreed to that. I KNEW IT WAS *NOT* MISCONDUCT because at least two PROFESSORS whom my mom knows said it is common practice that advisors put down the name of students.

 

[cristo]

That is definitely not intentional! My attitude towards Bombelli is positive one, so why would I want to accuse him?

If you're claiming that a co-author of yours did not make a significant contribution to the research that is contained in the paper, then you are accusing him of scientific misconduct, whether you intend to or not.

Incidentally, I don't think this thread will do your career any good!

 

[causalset]

Perhaps, but you have to remember Ross put himself on the line to save your education (PhD). It was because of PATIENT and NICE professors that you were able to get your PhD. Even thought, you put several of those professors "against a wall" many times by not doing what you were assigned to do, asking for their help and not following them, not admitting you don't understand,...

Yeah, and I never said anything bad about Ross either. Why would I? Neither Ross nor Bombelli EVER refused working with me. They BOTH saw me through completion of Ph.d. so I have no reason to accuse EITHER of them.

Now as far as the people I DID accuse (Wells, etc) if you are going to call it "scientific misconduct" or any otehr official name, I AM TAKING THAT ACCUSATION BACK RIGHT AWAY.

Here is the thing: in order to accuse a PARTICULAR PERSON of scientific misconduct, I have to say that person is WORSE than others. That is simply not true of Wells (the guy who tried to expell me) -- others probably would have lost patience FASTER than him. So my accusation is directed against HUMAN NATURE in general; not anyone who takes part of that human nature. I think EVERYONE is unfair and most people are MORE unfair than Wells is. So, I am not accusing Wells or any other individual. I simply accusing the system.

 

[atyy]

That is definitely not intentional! My attitude towards Bombelli is positive one, so why would I want to accuse him? ALL I did was explaining why *I* didn't do something; if the reason is cat running across my keyboard, I would say it is a cat, and I won't be accusing cat. THATS THE WAY I THOUGHT OF IT. Now if it SOUNDED like I accused him of misconduct, IT WASN"T MY INTENTION.

I think what Vanadium 50 is referring to is that under some policies editing a paper is perhaps an insufficient contribution to a study to warrant authorship. If so, putting one's name on the paper as an author merely because one had edited it could be misconduct. I think is clear to me from the link in your original post that you are very grateful to Bombelli, and that he did a lot of work on the paper. The question has to do with the interpretation of journal policies about authorship - these policies vary from journal to journal - an example:

http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/02_2.cfm
"Publication and Authorship Practices

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, execution or interpretation of the research study. All those who have made significant contributions should be offered the opportunity to be listed as authors. Other individuals who have contributed to the study should be acknowledged, but not identified as authors. The sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Plagiarism constitutes unethical scientific behavior and is never acceptable. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others used in a research project must always be given. Further, it is the obligation of each author to provide prompt retractions or corrections of errors in published works."

 

[causalset]

If you're claiming that a co-author of yours did not make a significant contribution to the research that is contained in the paper, then you are accusing him of scientific misconduct, whether you intend to or not.

Look, my mom talked to SEVERAL people and they ALL say that it is COMMON PRACTICE for advisor to put his name on student's work. In fact, I was told that it is so common that if both names are there, it is typically understood that a student did most of the work.

IF I MISUNDERSTAND IT, OR MY MOM WAS MISINFORMED, that has nothing to do with Bombelli. It has to do with professors who talked to my mom, and I am NOT going to tell you their names, since I don't want you to think I am accusing THEM of scientific misconduct. And by the way they don't evne KNOW Bombelli so whatever advise they gave is to MY best interest, which again means there was no "misconduct" on their part.

Incidentally, I don't think this thread will do your career any good!

Okay, how about this: if I go ahead and delete everything I wrote, will you NOT get me into trouble?

I can't do the deletion now since you will have to read what I said before in order to understand what I am talking about now. But can I, say, delete it by September 10, or whatever other deadline you give me?

 

[atyy]

For comparison with the APS's policy I posted above, here is PNAS's:

"Authorship should be limited to those who have contributed substantially to the work. The corresponding author must have obtained permission from all authors for the submission of each version of the paper and for any change in authorship.

All collaborators share some degree of responsibility for any paper they coauthor. Some coauthors have responsibility for the entire paper as an accurate, verifiable report of the research. These include coauthors who are accountable for the integrity of the data reported in the paper, carry out the analysis, write the manuscript, present major findings at conferences, or provide scientific leadership to junior colleagues. Coauthors who make specific, limited contributions to a paper are responsible for their contributions but may have only limited responsibility for other results. While not all coauthors may be familiar with all aspects of the research presented in their paper, all collaborators should have in place an appropriate process for reviewing the accuracy of the reported results.

Authors must indicate their specific contributions to the published work. This information will be published as a footnote to the paper. Examples of designations include:

* Designed research
* Performed research
* Contributed new reagents or analytic tools
* Analyzed data
* Wrote the paper

An author may list more than one contribution, and more than one author may have contributed to the same aspect of the work."

 

[causalset]

Okay one thing I didn't know is that informal communication on a message board can affect someone's career, or amount to accusaiton. But I BLAME MY IGNORANCE FOR IT. Just like I blame my ignorance for not knowing research is important because it doesn't constitute official grades on a transcript.

So now that I know that saying things BY ANY MEANS is an accusaiton, I take back everything I said.

 

[cristo]

Look, my mom talked to SEVERAL people and they ALL say that it is COMMON PRACTICE for advisor to put his name on student's work. In fact, I was told that it is so common that if both names are there, it is typically understood that a student did most of the work.

IF I MISUNDERSTAND IT, OR MY MOM WAS MISINFORMED, that has nothing to do with Bombelli. It has to do with professors who talked to my mom, and I am NOT going to tell you their names, since I don't want you to think I am accusing THEM of scientific misconduct. And by the way they don't evne KNOW Bombelli so whatever advise they gave is to MY best interest, which again means there was no "misconduct" on their part.

You need to stop shouting at people who are giving you advice. After all, you posted your story here for comments.

It is usual for students to have their supervisors on their papers because, for the most part, their supervisor will have done some of the work, had the idea, written sections etc etc. I'm not in a position to judge whether or not this is true in your case; I was merely pointing out the 'rules' (as atyy has pointed out) are pretty strict on such things. Therefore, you should be careful about accusations you are making whether you intended to or not.

Okay, how about this: if I go ahead and delete everything I wrote, will you NOT get me into trouble?

I'm not planning on getting you into trouble! You should, however, be aware of the consequences of making such comments on the internet. Remember that the internet is public, and viewable by anyone, and bear that in mind when commenting (/complaining) about your academic career.

 

[Vanadium 50]

the work is mine

As far as the mutual publication with Bombelli, all the calculations and physics content is MINE.

like I said I was the one who did all the content; Bombelli simply editted English for me

It doesn't matter that you like Bombelli. It doesn't matter that you agreed to this. It doesn't even matter if your mother said it's okay (although, to be honest, that's the first time I have ever heard this argument from someone with a doctorate). If the facts are as you say, Bombelli has engaged in scientific misconduct by affixing his name to someone else's work.

This is exceedingly serious.

 

[Count Iblis]

It is common practice for some authors to have contributed almost nothing toward paper. It strictly speaking violates journal guidlines, but you very often have a collaboration in which it is agreed that someone will be second or third author of one paper in exchange for collaboration on a related topic leading to other papers. That authorship is then earned for simply discussing a few minor points in which the collaboration on the new topic is agreed on.

Some people find this unethical and would refuse the offer to become second/third author in a paper they didn't conribute to, but many people I know don't have such problems. This is not considered to be scientific fraud, at least not in the field I work in.

 

[causalset]

It is usual for students to have their supervisors on their papers because, for the most part, their supervisor will have done some of the work, had the idea, written sections etc etc.

Okay, I am not accusing Bombelli ... I am going to say what my mom told me she heard from her professor friends, none of them know Bombelli.

Anyway, as far as my conversation with my mom goes (the one where she based her opinion on what her professor friends told her), I was telling her that I don't want to put Bombelli's name because then no one will know it is my work. Her response was that yes they will, and the way they will know is that it is common practice for students to put the advisor's name on it.

Now, if you say that the reason it is common practice is that advisors do part of the work, then my mom wouldn't have told me that everyone would know it is MY work and not his.

Again, no accusations in Bombelli's adress. He never said anything to this effect. That is what my mom was told by her friends who were professors.

You should, however, be aware of the consequences of making such comments on the internet. Remember that the internet is public, and viewable by anyone, and bear that in mind when commenting (/complaining) about your academic career.

Streets are also public, but if I say something on the street, then no matter WHAT I say and no matter WHO hears me, I can't get into trouble (the only exceptions would be admitting a crime, or saying there is a fire when there is none).

I assumed internet is the same way. Well, sure there is a difference in that I can be banned from the forum, but that difference is internal to the forum I am at. I thought that LEGALLY internet is the same as a street, which means that I won't have consequences for what I say BEYOND being banned from the forum.

If I am wrong, then I am sorry for what I said. I certainly did NOT intend to make LEGAL accusations against anyone I was talking about. I assumed internet is the same as the street. If it isn't, then I appologise.

 

[atyy]

It is usual for students to have their supervisors on their papers because, for the most part, their supervisor will have done some of the work, had the idea, written sections etc etc. I'm not in a position to judge whether or not this is true in your case; I was merely pointing out the 'rules' (as atyy has pointed out) are pretty strict on such things. Therefore, you should be careful about accusations you are making whether you intended to or not.

I did convey an impression that the rules are strict when I posted the APS's, but then when I checked PNAS's, they list writing a paper, which presumably includes massive editing. So maybe causalset might even consider asking his supervisor to be an author on the subsequent papers if the supervisor's "editing" amounts to "writing"? All involved should agree on authorship/non-authorship before the work commences (at least in some sort of "good faith", bearing in mind that the results of research are unknown, and we cannot predict who is going to make what discoveries in advance), and certainly before the paper is submitted to a journal.

 

[causalset]

It doesn't matter that you like Bombelli. It doesn't matter that you agreed to this. It doesn't even matter if your mother said it's okay (although, to be honest, that's the first time I have ever heard this argument from someone with a doctorate). If the facts are as you say, Bombelli has engaged in scientific misconduct by affixing his name to someone else's work.

This is exceedingly serious.

Okay, look, if Bombelli didn't do that work that he did, the paper would NOT look professional, and therefore even if I did press a botton and post it to arxiv, it would look bad.

I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT GRAMMAR. I am talking about the whole style thing. My natural writing style is very long winded. He made it very concise. Also, I wouldn't have used scientific names such as "holonomy"; he did. I wouldn't be able to make introduction brief and to the point, he did.

By the way HE wrote all introduction and ALL conclusion. YES originally I wrote both sections; but he have re-written them compeltely. This doesn't change the fact that ideas and calculations are mine; but still the quality of the paper is much better on MANY MANY levels BEYOND grammar and spelling.

 

[Vanadium 50]

It is common practice for some authors to have contributed almost nothing toward paper. It strictly speaking violates journal guidlines, but you very often have a collaboration in which it is agreed that someone will be second or third author of one paper in exchange for collaboration on a related topic leading to other papers. That authorship is then earned for simply discussing a few minor points in which the collaboration on the new topic is agreed on.

Some people find this unethical and would refuse the offer to become second/third author in a paper they didn't conribute to, but many people I know don't have such problems. This is not considered to be scientific fraud, at least not in the field I work in.

But this isn't the situation here. The situation here is, according to causalset, that he did all of the work, and the only thing Bombelli did was editing the text. I am aware of no journal that will accept this, nor of any scientific society that considers this acceptable. Indeed, a number of them specifically forbid this - see the APS guidelines, for example.

 

[Count Iblis]

But this isn't the situation here. The situation here is, according to causalset, that he did all of the work, and the only thing Bombelli did was editing the text. I am aware of no journal that will accept this, nor of any scientific society that considers this acceptable. Indeed, a number of them specifically forbid this - see the APS guidelines, for example.

Yes, I know that this is specificaly forbidden, but it still happens a lot. To be honest, in the past, I have been guilty of doing this myself two or three times (my name appearing on a paper to which I made infinitessimal contributions and vice versa). Many people I know do this quite often.


Not so long ago I was offered to be third author of a paper to which I contributed almost nothing to, and I refused. What I did would, according to most journal guidlines, merit nothing more than a brief mention in the acknowledgment section, and that's what happened.

 

[causalset]

But this isn't the situation here. The situation here is, according to causalset, that he did all of the work, and the only thing Bombelli did was editing the text. I am aware of no journal that will accept this, nor of any scientific society that considers this acceptable. Indeed, a number of them specifically forbid this - see the APS guidelines, for example.

The reason I said I did "all the work" is because we were talking about my skills to do PHYSICS, so I said I did all the physics.

Okay, let me show you how that is compatible with the fact that BOMBELLI DID A LOT OF WORK. I will list what I did and what Bombelli did:

I saw him every month or two, and my visits were week long

1. During my visit, I would tell him what I will do, so the idea is mine

2. We will DISCUSS IT AT LENGTH, and I won't do it unless HE APROVES. He rejected 90% of my ideas. So EVEN THOUGH the ideas are mine, it is due to HIS APPROVAL that I am doing the 10% I am doing, as opposed to 90% of other stuff

3. I would then go home and do all the calculations. So FIRST ROUGH DRAFT of calculations is mine

4. Then on my next visit, he will look through all of my calculations IN DETAIL. It would take him a full week to look through it, and every day of that week he spends most of the day looking through them as well to the point he puts teaching off

5. In the process there aer some simple algebra mistakes that WE BOTH correct TOGETHER (me and him)

6. Then I go home again and write ROUGH DRAFT of the paper. Again, FIRST ROUGH DRAFT is mine

7. Then I email him the rough draft.

8. Then I come visit him, and we both look through rough draft and again do editting.

9. Most of the editting of rough draft is HIS not mine, since I am clueless when it comes to writing

10. Even though on my first rough draft I have written EVERYTHING (main part AS WELL AS intro and conclusion) typically he has to delete the intro and conclusion I have written and rewrite it entirely.

NOW THE REASON I SAID I DID ALL THE WORK IS BECAUSE OF 1, 3 AND 6. BUT I AM NOT ACCUSING HIM OF MISCONDUCT BECAUSE HE DID THE REST.

 

[Count Iblis]

Okay, look, if Bombelli didn't do that work that he did, the paper would NOT look professional, and therefore even if I did press a botton and post it to arxiv, it would look bad.

I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT GRAMMAR. I am talking about the whole style thing. My natural writing style is very long winded. He made it very concise. Also, I wouldn't have used scientific names such as "holonomy"; he did. I wouldn't be able to make introduction brief and to the point, he did.

By the way HE wrote all introduction and ALL conclusion. YES originally I wrote both sections; but he have re-written them compeltely. This doesn't change the fact that ideas and calculations are mine; but still the quality of the paper is much better on MANY MANY levels BEYOND grammar and spelling.

This sort of collaboration leading to both names to apper on a paper is even less controversial. It happens far more often than the more problematic type of "collaboration" in which one or more authors do almost nothing.

 

[Jasongreat]

How can someone choose a path(college), and then get upset when he doesn't follow the rules of his teachers and advisors? If you choose to go into the system you must abide by the rules of the system, period, or you have to live with the consequences. If you don't want to follow rules don't go into the system. Last I checked Newton, Einstien, Faraday, Edison, Tesla(could probably go on and on) didnt have degrees let alone a doctorate, although some of the above did get honorary degrees after the fact. You don't need college to become a physicist, although it does make it a lot easier(all the info is in one place), it is not required.
If you don't like to follow the rules(too good for them,remember all discoveries are usually repudiations of existing rules), then do it on your own and you only have to follow your own rules, however you have to remember that you will have to fight harder than someone that does follow the system because they will have a degree(supposed proof of emminent knowledge) and you wont, but if a theory you come up with is true (and can be proven)how can they dispute you? I'm not saying they won't dispute you just because of the fact that you might be destroying something they were taught to be true, you will surely have to fight for everything you earn, but it will be earnt not given. (sorry for the spelling and grammar, but that's what happens when you choose not to go to college,LOL)

 

[atyy]

The reason I said I did "all the work" is because we were talking about my skills to do PHYSICS, so I said I did all the physics.

Okay, let me show you how that is compatible with the fact that BOMBELLI DID A LOT OF WORK. I will list what I did and what Bombelli did:

I saw him every month or two, and my visits were week long

1. During my visit, I would tell him what I will do, so the idea is mine

2. We will DISCUSS IT AT LENGTH, and I won't do it unless HE APROVES. He rejected 90% of my ideas. So EVEN THOUGH the ideas are mine, it is due to HIS APPROVAL that I am doing the 10% I am doing, as opposed to 90% of other stuff

3. I would then go home and do all the calculations. So FIRST ROUGH DRAFT of calculations is mine

4. Then on my next visit, he will look through all of my calculations IN DETAIL. It would take him a full week to look through it, and every day of that week he spends most of the day looking through them as well to the point he puts teaching off

5. In the process there aer some simple algebra mistakes that WE BOTH correct TOGETHER (me and him)

6. Then I go home again and write ROUGH DRAFT of the paper. Again, FIRST ROUGH DRAFT is mine

7. Then I email him the rough draft.

8. Then I come visit him, and we both look through rough draft and again do editting.

9. Most of the editting of rough draft is HIS not mine, since I am clueless when it comes to writing

10. Even though on my first rough draft I have written EVERYTHING (main part AS WELL AS intro and conclusion) typically he has to delete the intro and conclusion I have written and rewrite it entirely.

NOW THE REASON I SAID I DID ALL THE WORK IS BECAUSE OF 1, 3 AND 6. BUT I AM NOT ACCUSING HIM OF MISCONDUCT BECAUSE HE DID THE REST.

Yes, that seems clear by APS and PNAS policies that your supervisor deserves to have his name on the paper, eg. 2 is really being part of the creative process. Perhaps you should offer him to be an author on all your subsequent papers for which he does as much work as you have listed above? Just suggesting, I don't know the details, but something to think about, and discuss/re-discuss with him.

 

[Pyrrhus]

I wouldn't pay more attention to casualset's claim that he did all the work... Even from his actions described in his story, and how he reacts to everyone's opinion, you can tell he writes without paying much attention to what he is writing. For example, Vanadium casually commented having a PhD does not translates to being a Good Researcher, and then he replied by claiming he doesn't know how to publish in journals (unlikely for someone with a PhD from a reputable school like UMICH), and he claims that he did all the work in his published papers, even though he is a co-author.

Now, casualset further clarifies that Bombelli (the other co-author) did participate actively in the paper... .

 

[cristo]

Streets are also public, but if I say something on the street, then no matter WHAT I say and no matter WHO hears me, I can't get into trouble (the only exceptions would be admitting a crime, or saying there is a fire when there is none).

If a person who is thinking of employing you hears you slagging off a previous employer in such a way as you have done here, then he will think twice about employing you. That is my point. I'm not talking about you being banned, or you being involved in legal battles, I'm simply saying that you should watch what you say, since you never know who is listening who may have an influence in your career in the future.

 

[causalset]

If a person who is thinking of employing you hears you slagging off a previous employer in such a way as you have done here, then he will think twice about employing you. That is my point. I'm not talking about you being banned, or you being involved in legal battles, I'm simply saying that you should watch what you say, since you never know who is listening who may have an influence in your career in the future.

Look, that is PRECISELY the one thing I was missing which ruined my career. I was assuming that if I don't do well with prof. X, then Prof. X will be the only person who would ever know I didn't do well. So then when I was awaken to the fact that prof. X talks ot other profs and it has impact on my career, I was shocked, hence this whole post.

Now, ANOTHER MISTAKE TO THE SAME AMOUNT is that I think that no matter who overhears me on the streets, even if it be my next employer, they aer not allowed to base anything on it since it is not a document with my signature on it. Again, same exact mistake.

Okay, Asperger Syndrome is a form of autism. So it means I am not good when it comes to human interactions. THAT is why I am getting confused.