(luck) I win H!

Hmm, yes, I guess I would prefer a slow, fat spider to an athletic one. We had one of those too the other week. I actually fell off a chair trying to avoid it - no harm done My mum likes to describe how they 'gallop' across the room - very apt I think.

How do you deal with them juno? The fat, hairy ones are the worst by far... The biggest I've had (a few years ago) came out when I was home alone - it had a body the size of 5p coin and the legs to go with it (yes, I actually got out a 5p and compared it). I'm totally against killing them - think I slowly chased that one towards the door.

I'm nearly finished, and I don't think I would do it again. I still feel the same way I did at the start about research - that there is so much to explore, so much I could do, so much I'd LIKE to do...but now I know how difficult it is, and that I'm really not suited to the environment of academia - academically (I find the work too difficult)and socially. So now when I think I could apply for this or that postdoc (which I still 'dream' of doing) I know better! None of my PhD experience has lived up to my expectations, and I'm left feeling pretty disappointed, regardless of the qualification I come out with.

It's not something silly like when the person says "Then I don't know..." they are saying "I don't know what colour the oldest child's eyes are" - is it?

aaw, baby...here are some goodies

limit as in that's the MINIMUM allowed time?

kronkodile and UFO - since you're PhD graduates I thought I would ask...how long was it between submission of your thesis and the viva? Any idea what's typical - what's a reasonable amount of time to allow the examiners to read the thesis? (Anyone else feel free to comment too.) Brian May's examiners only took a few weeks

but it's how I got something to work, that the literature suggested SHOULDN'T work, with my VERY limited resources. Going to stop writing in these brackets now!)
I don't think that's how science works in the best labs, but when the people who could solve your problems - the real experts in your field - AREN'T in your lab, maybe that's how it works. It's partly why I've decided I can't cope with a career in science. If I did decide to work on, I'd make sure I was working under the world leader (or very close to) in my field. That might sound a bit over the top, but if everyone took that approach I reckon there'd be much more progress made.

Yes, I've felt exactly like that. I think it's not very likely that what you're trying to do is fundamentally impossible (for purely scientific reasons). Like you say, it's just figuring out what you can do to make it work with the equipment and advice/knowledge (or lack of) that's available to you. That's been my experience when I've struggled with something for months and months. I got things to work when I really threw myself at them (I'm not saying you're not working hard enough, just an observation that my results came when, in absolute desperation, I worked like I was crazy - not long hours, but trying approach after approach and disregarding them if they didn't work almost straight away - without even trying to understand why they didn't. I'm sure that's not the correct scientific approach - it's certainly not how I imagined science worked, and it was very unpleasant, no calm, no easy pace...

postulates...didn't have time to check if it was in the phrase bank.

I keep thinking I understand it...and then...my mind just goes again. I understand on some level

Yup, the way my writing up is going I reckon a feathered friend could do a better job - 'analogical reasoning' and all that...

Look at the clever bird...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6948446.stm

Yeah, I was trying to say (without offending anyone) that I DON'T like it, and don't really want to do it even though there are times when it would make things easier for me...
I guess people see it done in books and think it's okay, but I'm sure the authors of a book got all the necessary permissions.