akjssdk

Not sure about that, the convention is to cite however someone appears on the paper right? That way everything is consistent.

I am not sure if this is how it is a correct representation. I believe a common approach is to do a short history of quantum in the first year, and then do a from the ground up approach in the second and third year. Depending on who teaches it, this is either starting from a particle in a box or the approach stated here. The historical story is useful, because it tells a little bit of the why.

I don't think the actual proposed superconductivity mechanism is the relevant part of this paper. It is much easier to prove that this is superconducting than to prove why. And in a sense it is a bit less relevant. Although developing a working theory for room temperature is also probably worth a Nobel prize, so I am willing to bet some theorists are also running to their blackboards as we speak.

The national Dutch funding agency that effectively funds all research in the Netherlands requires this. Buy considers it sufficient for you to publish in a closed journal and then deposit a copy in an open repository. The French also have a similar system I believe.

To be clear, there is some dissipation with magnons, just a lot less than Joule heating. But exciting a magnon will heat up your sample, because magnons don't live forever and decay after some time. That energy has to go somewhere.

To be fair, this is really field dependent. In the sciences this is (mostly) true, but in the humanities your output for your PhD is sometimes just your thesis. The problem is fundamentally that the PhD traject is geared towards an academic career, but there are not enough academic positions for all those PhD students, so they end up in industry. And there their skills don't really translate that well, as OP also says.

This works wonders, especially for collaborative documents (which a thesis should be, a collaboration between you and your supervisor/other people). A first "vomit" draft allows you to at least discuss the concepts, and it forces you to align the thoughts in your head. It is how I have written all my papers/thesis, and I cannot recommended it enough!

Why is no one considering that this PhD student is wrong and that his supervisor does in fact know what they are doing? Starting in a new field is hard, and it takes years to get a broad view of the field in order to understand what directions to take. As a PhD student you are not expected to be able to do this: this is why you have a supervisor who has enough experience. Maybe the supervisor does have a clear vision as to where to take the research, and the student does not yet see this?

Cyclists are protected by law, such that even if an accident is the fault of the cyclist, the car driver is still 50% liable. This in combination with the infrastructure, which separates cyclists and cars as much as possible, makes the Netherlands very safe for cyclists.

Note that younger children still usually wear a helmet, since they are more likely to have an accident on their own (i.e. falling over).

Just to add: he has always said that after the Olympics he is retiring (at age 25). He has not confirmed it as far as I know, but he has hinted at it in interviews and also in this document. He basically took the long distances in speed skating by storm, and is now doing a massive mic drop.

Only if you want to sync pdfs using the Zotero server does Zotero cost money. Anything else is completely free, including syncing your db (without pdf attachments). If you want to sync your pdfs you can point Zotero to a webDAV server, this has worked flawlessly for me.

This is fairly common in newish kitchens in the Netherlands too, especially if the kitchen is far away from the boiler. Sometimes even with a boiling water tap, so you don't even need a kettle anymore.

From the article "Prolific, a tool for scientists conducting behavioral research, had no screening tools in place to make sure that it delivered representative population samples to each study.". I would argue that studies from this tool were already disrupted if you are not screening your users in some way.

Why is it that people are always so quick to suggest (couples) therapy? Is it so unlikely that two adults can work something out between themselves, especially if they are in a marriage? Being married is essentially figuring out these mini conflicts, so you better be good at it. That's not to say that counseling cannot help, but it always seems like such an overreaction. Also: please don't take relationship advice from random strangers :)