Mm, it's a very specific question. I dont know how many people are currently on that course, but chances are that they do not use this forum. Why not try and contact the department that runs the Masters programme and see whether one of the current students is happy to talk to you? Or maybe the Alumni society (or similar) of Imperial College can help to find people who have been on that course?

Blimey, no I have not heard of that before.
Although it is annoying, especially the way your supervisor has handled the situation, I suppose the question is whether you'd want to "force" him to stay your supervisor when he's indicated that he's too busy and by "dumping" you actually not inclined to spend lots of time supervising you. If you are in principle happy with the new supervisor, go with him. I have several supervisors and it works relatively well as I seek their input whenever required, but I think it really depends on the specifics of your projects...

I dont know much about PhDs in the US, but I agree that ploughing on is the way out here... (not the only one of course..) It seems you are in a tricky position, especially if your supervisor does not want to change aims. During my PhD I have found that moving goalposts is completely acceptable (esp. when you do high risk experiments) and when I went to a "final year PhD" workshop, it went as far as: you have to work with whatever you've got at a particular point and then form your hypotheses/aims in such a way as to make them fit your results, so that a examiner can see that you have achieved your aims. Any other aims, e.g. ones you originally had, could come in as "further work" in your thesis. I know that kind of approach seems almost anti-science methodology, but it acknowledges that you have to finish your PhD at some point ( we all could go on and on and on with our topic, right?!) and that it might not be the highlight of your scientific career. It is a learning process, and the aim is to come out as a competent researcher.
I think it might help to ask yourself just how much longer you are willing to spend on your project and work towards that deadline. Talk to your supervisor telling him what you intend to do, present a workplan, and your amended aims. In the end it is your work, and although we all want our theses to be amazing and groundbreaking, all they need to really be is of sufficient standard to make us pass. Don't give up - good luck.

You say you are the first one in your family to do a PhD (+ you are working full time!) So, although you tell your family you are tired and stressed etc, they might not truly understand just how stressed you are. I agree with the previous poster that you need to sit down with your family and tell them in a calm, non-whingey way, just how difficult it is. You have to tell them what's in your head/mind/body so they understand where you are at, and appreciate how challenging it is to do a good job a PhD. I am sure they will understand. Best of luck.

Like you do, I see the PhD (at least) like a full time job, so I come into the office every weekday. I think it really depends what works for you - I cannot really work well at home, as it is too much associated with relaxation and "things away from PhD", but I know several people who work from home a lot. I think it is good to go into the office as you develop a good work ethic and routine, you are available for other people (your sup, co-workers, friends) and other people are directly reachable for yourself, and sometimes in that way, solutions to problems are found quickly (no emails, waits etc required). Plus, there is an element of seeing and being seen, and it is important that other people in your department know that you exist (and maybe know what you do). You say your office is busy, so yes, I can see that maybe you might work better at home... What's about listening to music whilst you work, in order to blend out the distracting noises from others? I do not work with music myself, but know that fellow students find it useful. Hope that helps?!

I think it really depends on what you want to do after your PhD: If you want to stay in academia, publishing is essential (they say "publish or perish"), but if you know that you will end up in industry or any other non-academic place, I think publishing is not so important. Generally I think, most PhD students want to publish their work, but there might be various reasons why they won't (not enough support from supervisors, not enough data or data are not of high enough quality, lack of time(!) etc). I think your focus should be on producing good work and getting/passing your PhD. If you manage to write papers, either as part of the PhD (e.g. papers as chapters) or in addition to chapters, then that's great, otherwise, it can still be done afterwards. As for myself, I hope to use one or two papers as chapters, so as not to duplicate efforts, but what you are allowed to submit as a thesis really depends on your field and university regulations.

I think there is no problem with contacting the person and asking for details of their work, although I would not ask for the whole thesis/work whilst the person is still writing up. It is probably worth finding out whether they have already published something (it might be in the "accepted" or "proof reading" stage and the person might be happy for you to have a copy of the paper and in turn you can properly reference their work). Alternatively, you can always tell the person what you are working on and ask them whether there is some overlap with their work? Good luck.

I would have thought your headings cover it all.

About the non-academic work experience, yes, I believe normally non-academic jobs wont go on a academic CV, BUT I think if your non-academic job involves transferable skills that are relevant in the academic world, I would include it briefly (few lines, not more). I am thinking "working in starbucks" not to include but maybe anything to do with people management/media/presenting/possibly administration/finance. You say freelance work - so that shows you take initiative to look for the job(s), so if it fits, I would put it on the CV.

Re description of PhD at the back of CV, yes, I have heard that too. I presume it's something you do for the first time you apply for jobs after getting the PhD.

I would list education development courses, and if you've been to a lot, select a few relevant ones.

I have been to a workshop where they said to make a "complete" CV, i.e. including everything, every course, previous job, poster presentation etc, and then when it comes to applying for jobs, selecting only the relevant items.

Mmm, yes, chocolate helps too:-)

Love the origami idea- have to get myself one of those!(up)

Ok, that sounds pretty bad. I am still quite a bit away from my viva, so I can only try to imagine what your situation feels like.
Is it possible maybe to talk to a postgraduate administrator/Head of postgraduate studies who can give you advice what the "procedure" is in a case like this? What's about your internal examiner, could he/she help? (In our department, it is the internal examiner who organises the viva etc).

Difficult one. How much can you use/present the same data, but take a different angle on it? A different focus that will give you slightly different conclusion? I think overlap to some degree is acceptable, 95% sounds a little high, in my opinion.
good luck...

Yep, had something not too dissimilar when my sup said he would write that one paper for me (which would go into the thesis as a chapter). I agree, this is uncool. At the time he said it I did not disagree with him openly as I figured that he might not do it/have the time in the end after all. But yes, I am not sure what to do if he is serious about it. It is kind of weird how he is otherwise "generous" and lets all his postdocs, phds be first author (no authorship disputes), but then wants to do this sort of thing. I completely empathise with you, you're not the only one in that position and yes, I find it uncool and it is not helpful in any way (with respect to learning how to write)...

What's about not working from home - is that possible? that way you could at least work in peace and are not continously confronted with the difficult situation at home. If you cannot work in a university building (your department/uni library..) what's about a local public space you can go to, e.g. local library, or alternatively, work at a friend's house or something? I am not sure you need to separate from your partner, all you need is a proper working place/environment...?

I reckon 35-80 hours is about right... in my department, there are some who do their 9-5 kind of thing, and then others who work all hours and send emails in the middle of the night... Unfortunately, it seems that the ones who work more hours are more successful (i.e. write more papers/get more grants) than the ones who have a life outside work.. I can hope that looks are deceiving and it's all about working smarter, not harder?!

Absolutely, it is normal. Check out this essay by Martin A. Schwartz on "The importance of stupidity in scientific research"

http://jcs.biologists.org/cgi/content/full/121/11/1771

It might not necessarily give you what you wanted to hear/read, but it might help you to understand where you are at!