text:
How do I talk to my professor about my anxiety/depression?
I am 22 years old and I have recently began my first year of grad school. It is very overwhelming. Everyone seems to have more developed thoughts than I do, and all my classmates are 2nd or 3rd year PhD students who speak in metaphors. I have struggled with anxiety and depression for about 5 years now. I have had all kinds of treatment for it. I am currently not being treated for it. About a year ago I decided I did not want to take medicine anymore, and my doctor gave me permission to wean myself off of it. Up until last month I was okay. The way I feel right now I have not felt in two years. My anxiety attacks are prevalent and I am so overwhelmed with sadness I cant get up in the morning or eat. . I have probably about 3/4 attacks a day and because of it I have not been to my class in 3 weeks. I am up to date on all assignments, however, participation is 25% of my grade and I have now missed a total of 4 classes out of 12 overall.
I do not know how to talk to my professor about this. I have crippling anxiety when speaking to professors about my struggle with anxiety due to a bad experience. In my last semester of undergrad, I disclosed to my law professor that I had anxiety in general, and also extreme anxiety when speaking in front of  a large group. He essentially told me that he did not care and I needed to get over it. He also said that if i ever tried again to "take an easy way out", he would fail me. Long story short, I got up in front of the class to present my brief and I fainted two minutes in. My professor laughed and made jokes about me and I decided not to apply to law school. I am forever scarred by this and I am tempted to just take a W in this class, but I feel deep down that the right thing to do is talk to my professor first. If anyone has any advice for me, I would really appreciate it. I am just very insecure about this. Sometimes my depression convinces me that I am not depressed at all and I should just get over it, but I don't know how.

Does your school have a disabilities office?  (If you are in the US, they do; it's required by law.) They should be able to help you with this. (Try to visit them sooner, rather than later; this will likely make it easier for them to help you.)

They do. I just don't know what they can do for me. I don't know what i would be asking for from them. It isnt as if I need help on tests or extended due dates. I'm sure you are right, I just dont know what they would say or be able to do.

If you are missing class due to your health issues, they may be able to help you make alternative arrangements to "make up" your participation grades. They can also help you communicate with your professors (including, if you want, telling your professors that you're missing class for health reasons and keeping the details private from them). Or if you decide that withdrawing from the course is the right thing for you to do, they may be able to help you arrange a medical withdrawal.

They can also direct you to psychological help. A psychologist can teach you how to deal with and prevent anxiety attacks. And if you are clinically depressed, your chances of recovering are much better with treatment.

And BTW, the professor that laughed at you was a humongous jerk and shouldn't be teaching. Fortunately, there aren't so many of these, I hope you find an understanding person.

@user63290 Regarding "I just don't know what they can do for me. I don't know what i would be asking for from them." — just showing/eMailing them what you have written would provide you with an answer. It's not like you have to tell them what you need — that is likely something you'll determine together.

+1 to @Davidmh - that is appalling behaviour, not to mention unprofessional, from that professor

Related meta post: http://meta.academia.stackexchange.com/q/1588/10643

First, everyone feels overwhelmed in grad school, and nearly everyone suffers from imposter syndrome.  It isn't just you who feels like everyone around you is better.  This isn't likely to help with your illness, obviously, but I think every grad student is better off once they internalize that idea.
As @ff524 pointed out in the comments, the first thing you need to do is go talk to your school's disabilities office.  You don't need to go in with a clear picture of how it goes or what you want out of it - you just need to go in and explain the situation to them just as you did to us.  It's their job to help you, and very often that includes facilitating conversations with your professors as well.
You don't have to go to your professor and throw yourself on their mercy.  I understand why you would be traumatized from the awful experience you described, but understand that what that professor did wasn't just wrong, it was likely illegal. Faculty have clear obligations that the disabilities office will help them understand and work through, just like they help you.
You should also get in touch with a mental health professional.  If you're in a new town away from your old one, go to your school's health center and I'm certain they can refer you.
Basically the only "wrong" thing you could do is to continue doing nothing.  Get in and get help right away, and don't feel even remotely bad about doing so.  This is exactly what those resources are there for.

On top of the already good answers given by @Jeff.L and @aparente001, I just wanted to give an extra tip since I have dealt with this a lot (runs in my family).
You have problems, and they've already had an effect on your performance. That's now part of your history. The future, on the other hand, is still fair game. Obviously you wish those problems would go away so you could have a better future, but you feel that's impossible because you've already screwed up badly and don't think your problems will go away. Now, you  can't change the past and you will likely have those emotional/mental issues forever, but you are in control of how much you let those problems affect your daily life starting now.
You know when you lie in bed for hours, dwelling on all your regrets (academics, research, love, overall self-worth, etc.)? You know when you go about your day and can't stop thinking about how screwed you are? Here's what I tell myself: "I've got deep seated emotional problems and a long-list of screw ups, so it's quite likely that I am a no-good loser with a bleak future. However, if I start trying to fix my future now (e.g. by coming up with a rational plan and putting into action), it can only become better, and that's worth something."
I know this all might sound obvious, but for a long time I had always subconsciously separated my problems and my dwellings on those problems. I was only able to start feeling better after I realized that thinking about those problems was a problem by itself, and that I could in fact fix it by just forcing myself to only do things that would make things better (of course, against my mopey-self's will).

Professors are chosen based on their research track record, funding they obtained, and personal relationships. Teaching and social skills play only a minor role in the selection process, and while universities try to offer training, few make use of such offers. While school teachers usually are trained in paedagogy, university professors are usually not!
Thus, professors tend to have very little (i.e. no) training for such situations, either. They will not be able to help you much, you are likely better off with a professional doctor and the university services. I'm pretty sure there is a counseling service that can also talk to your professors.
Furthermore, professors do get a lot of bad excuses presented, including very weird claims. So they tend to apply a simple rule: you need to present a (e.g. medical) certificate that you were unable to take the test, or e.g. require some special treatment. You can get such certificates in the responsible offices at the university.
And they are probably even advised by the legal department to do exactly this: delegate to the responsible people.

+1 It's nice to see an answer which addresses the fact that professors generally do not have adequate training for dealing with these types of situations, and, when it comes to students and the problems they face in their lives, it is very hard to separate the wheat from the chaff.

In the US, the professor's rule is more likely "You have to bring this up with the dedicated office whose job it is to handle these matters, and they will tell me what accommodations to make for you without revealing your private medical details to me" (because students in the US can request accommodations without having to supply the medical certificate to the professor, from whom they may wish to keep their health situation private).

I have heard depression described as feeling as though one is in a dark hole that there is no way out of.  Well, that would certainly make it harder to advocate for oneself!  Therefore, you might find it helpful to work with an advocate or a peer mentor, at least in the short term.  Such a person can give you a little leg up so you can start to climb out of the dark hole.
Here are some places where you might be able to find an advocate or peer mentor (you can try both the town where you are enrolled in school, as well as the place you were living prior to starting grad school):

county mental health association
disability advocacy organization (this might have a variety of titles, such as "independence center"; it's often the place that lends out wheel chairs and walkers to people who have had a recent injury -- in addition to a whole lot of other services)
National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) chapter
disability awareness student club at your university

If I've left something important off this list, I hope others will fill in additional ideas through comments.
I imagine that the depression itself may be contributing to your feeling that talking to a professor or administrator at the university would be useless.  Also, your previous negative experiences in this area did not help!
It is very true, as @ff524 said, that there is much that a university student disability office can do, and I concur that getting connected with yours would be very worthwhile.  As she pointed out, they can, among other things:

arrange for accommodations that will make it easier for you to
function academically during difficult periods
assist with making your instructors aware that you are working with a special challenge, and help them understand what your accommodations are
arrange a medical withdrawal if you opt for that

There are two things I want you to know about university student disability offices before you contact them:

Although there may be someone there who may lend a sympathetic ear, and this in itself can do a person a world of good, I expect they will require medical documentation of your condition before doing anything tangible for you.
Some of these offices do not have, shall we say, a good bedside manner.  Some do, some don't.

Even if your student disabilities office is one of the really good ones, ultimately it is going to be up to you to figure out what accommodations would be helpful for you.  There is some trial and error to figuring this out, of course.
In advocating for my thirteen-year-old son, who has Tourette Syndrome, OCD, ADHD and anxiety (and has also dealt with some periods of depression), I have found it helpful to learn as much as I can about his conditions, and brainstorm accommodations by reading lists of accommodations that other students with his conditions have found helpful.  I took a tiny glance on the web for university level accommodations for depression and anxiety; here are two links to get you started in this exploration:
http://www.disabilityrightsnc.org/sites/default/files/2013%20Higher%20Ed%20Self-Advocacy%20Packet%20Students%20with%20MI.pdf
https://cpr.bu.edu/resources/reasonable-accommodations/what-accommodations-support-school-performance
And now I suppose I should say something about treatment.  Both cognitive behavioral treatment and pharmacological approaches can take time to show improvement in symptoms.  Of course, a delay in deciding whether to start or re-start treatment would result in further delays.  I think that's all I want to say on that topic.
At this point in my answer, I would like to encourage you to reread the beginning section, about the potential usefulness of working with an advocate or a peer mentor.
I must say that despite the negatives that you wrote about with great honesty in your question, the self-awareness you showed is a very good sign.  Let us know how it goes!

I'm going to also add my perspective: Professors are people to. They have spouses, children, parents, and friends who may have depression and other mental health problems, diagnosed or undiagnosed, treated or not. They're also usually a couple or three decades older, so they have seen such issues in their lives for a much longer time. They may suffer from the same issues as you do.
What I want to say is that you should expect, exceptions such as the one that you cite not withstanding, that the professors you talk to care about these issues because they've seen them in their personal lives. Make them part of your solution and let them help you.
I recognize that not everyone will be in a position to do so -- you reference one example. But if you take the courage to talk to a few people who you have had good interactions with, chances are you will find someone who is willing to talk to you about it, and willing to help find ways to help you!

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
Recommendation Letter sent from an unofficial email of the director of a start-up
I work for a start-up. Due to budget constraints, employees don't have company domain specific emails yet, we just have one general domain email ID for clients to contact the company. I need to get a recommendation letter for my application to graduate schools in the US, mainly for an MS in Engineering Management. Will my application be rejected if the director of the company sends in the LoR from their personal email? Or can I use the one general domain specific email ID the company has to send in the LoR?

Is there a portal for uploading documents? Or are they emailed?

No need to worry. There will either be a portal to upload the letter, or the person on the other side of the email address to which the email is sent will accept it as is. While it is usual for people in academia in the US to send these letters from the official email address at their home institution, it is quite common for people in other countries to use their personal email address for this (and for other work-related emails). We in the US know this, and accept things this way.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
Getting response from thank you email in second round of interview
I have second round faculty interview and send thank you notes to Dean of the Dept., chair of the committee and chair of the Dept. The first two replied me, even though I did not expect the Dean replies me. Is it a good sign?
Thank you!

Sorry, I know it's hard to be in such an uncertain state, but we cannot tell you anything useful. From the linked question: 'Do not waste time trying to read the tea leaves (e.g., "Hmm, they said 'we will let you know'...is that a good sign?"); this is fruitless. You should continue your job search until you have accepted a written offer.'

Well, of course it's not a bad sign. But you can't read too much into it. When we're hiring and a candidate sends me a thank you note, I always respond. It's just a polite thing to do. The fact that I responded doesn't tell them whether they're the top choice or already ruled out. We would never communicate that till the search was over.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
How can I get an academic post after recently finishing my doctorate research?
I have a career question. I recently finished my DBA degree (Doctor of Business Administration) and I am applying for academic posts however, my applications keep being unsuccessful. I am aware that I don't have formal teaching experience, however, I do have informal teaching, tutoring and advising students. In other terms, I was providing freelancing support to students at the Bachelor, Master, and Doctorate levels. I tried to highlight these points in my teaching supporting statement however, I keep receiving negative responses.
My research record was also impacted during the COVID so I am trying now to recuperate for that. Is there any advice that I can use when applying for academic posts?
Also, can you give me any advice on how to get post-doc positions? Shall I keep emailing professors in other universities and show interest in joining their departments?

What country are you looking in? What types of institutions?

Do the announcements of vacancies you apply for mention the desired (or required) characteristics of the applicant?  In particular, is DBA an adequate degree?  (As opposed to a PhD. in business.  What degrees did your instructors in business have?)  I would email only departments that have advertised available positions; those ads will tell you where to send your applications.

Please clarify your specific problem or provide additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it's hard to tell exactly what you're asking.

This is a duplicate of so many other questions on this forum. Keep searching for posts where people ask what they can do to improve their chances to get a position.

Shall I keep emailing professors in other universities and show
interest in joining their departments?

Please, no no no no no. It is called cold-emailing, you as a DBA should know better than me what is the rate of success on this technique.
Find a research theme you are interested into, from there try to see where you can fit into.


text:
Digital object identification in arxiv
A few months ago I have published my paper in arxiv. Now I came to know that a automatic DOI (digital object identification) number is given to it. Is it ok or normal?
I have no idea about DOI. What is the given DOI?

Ask Google. Google knows all, tells all.

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/62480/why-does-arxiv-org-not-assign-dois

Since the question of what a DOI is has been answered already by @Buffy, I will only answer the question of whether this is normal or okay.
Since January 2022 arXiv is automatically assigning a DOI to every preprint in addition to the arXiv identifier. This change hase been announced on the arxiv.org blog.
One of the reasons for this change is the goal to make the preprints easier to discover via different search engines.
Update May 2022: Now all existing arXiv preprints have a DOI (thank you @Jake for this information).

update: All arXiv-ids now contain a DOI link.

@Jake this is what is meant by "Since January 2022 arXiv is automatically assigning a DOI to every preprint". Do you think that something should be added here?

this means that we backfilled DOIs for all 2+ million entries in our repository. It was the plan to do this once the first new papers and recent years were completed, and they now have been.

@Jake: Thanks! Sorry, I did not get the original comment. I will add this information to the answer.

No worries. We only completed this part of the project about a month ago, so your original answer is still valid... all of arXiv now have DOI in addition to our persistent arXiv-ids.

A google search will turn up the link to the official site: https://www.doi.org.
It will also give a link to the neutral explanations at Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier.
From Wikipedia:

A digital object identifier (DOI) is a persistent identifier or handle used to identify objects uniquely, standardized by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO).

See the links for more.
ArXiv has information about automatic assignment of a DOI here: https://arxiv.org/help/bib_feed


text:
Can I apply for research assistantship at universities abroad?
I am a recent master's graduate looking for a job. However, instead of working in the industry, I would prefer to work for a couple of years as a research assistant. My long-term goal is to apply for a Ph.D. program and research experience will help me get there.
My country is very limited in such opportunities which will act as leverage during my Ph.D. applications. Hence, I was wondering if there are universities that hire international candidates as research assistants? I will of course need visa sponsorship for that.
Working as a research assistant at a good university will let me network with known scientists in my field. Therefore, strengthening my LoRs.

Why not directly apply for PhD programs? Afaik it's much more common.

In the US, at least, and perhaps several other places, the term "Research Assistant" is used for a position connected to doctoral education only. In some lab sciences (chemistry,...) a grant-funded lab might also hire other more permanent people, but they might be called "Lab Assistants" or "Lab Technicians" rather than Research Assistants. An RA position lasts up to the time of graduation and most of the perks involve tuition forgiveness and such, not salary.
But a lab assistant follows the direction of others and is only peripherally involved with research in the lab and so it might not even be a good place to get a LoR for a doctoral application. Such folks may be essential, but they are employees not researchers.
I doubt that such opportunities exist in Statistics per se as most statisticians don't work in laboratories requiring maintenance of equipment and such. Biostatistics might be different in some cases.
But if you want to get a doctorate, then applying for one (yet again) may solve your problems altogether. Again, in the US, most doctoral students at good universities are funded, either through a Teaching Assistantship or an RA.
If you were rejected already then I suggest you broaden your search. If it was a narrow search, especially one centered at top level universities then a broader search might be successful. And you may need to talk to your letter writers to see why they affect your application. The letter writers should be people who know you and your work and are willing to use their own reputation to predict your success. I've gotten at least one student over the line in a good place by letting the dean there know things that weren't reflected in the normal application materials. The person I'm thinking of is now a full professor at a top school.

It would help to know the field you're in as there could be exceptions that I'm not aware of.
From my experience in STEM, research assistant opportunities for Master's graduates are very rare (especially so for sponsoring an international candidate). If there was funding for a research assistantship position it would usually go a PhD graduate (ie. postdoc) - international candidates are very common in this case.

My field is statistics, biostatistics, data science.


text:
Is it appropriate to cold call a prospective postdoc PI?
If a professor shares their office phone number on their website, can I make a call and ask them about postdoc positions? What should I say to them?

Can you explain why you're considering doing that rather than reaching out via email? Or even - calling the departmental secretariat?

Most people are recommending against it.  I also recommend against it, albeit not as strongly.  Because there is a close to 0% chance that the PI will actually answer the phone, it will probably just be a waste of OP's time with no consequence.

Is it their (as in "personal, managed by them") or "their on the school website, automatically generated" (basically a directory) . If this is the second they may have no say about whether the phone numbers are displayed or not. In any case, I would not call.

Thanks for comments and answers! I did not call the PI, which was 100% the correct choice! I really don't know what was I thinking...

Personally, I wouldn't attempt it. If you interrupt something they consider serious they won't like it much. And, what can they say but to look for published announcements? Do you think they want to listen to your qualifications in real time? It is just to easy to hang up, as you might do for any marketing call.
A short introductory email would be preferable. Say who you are. A sentence about your interest. A couple of sentences about your qualifications. Offer to provide any additional information needed. Ask for a reply.
The email can be handled asynchronously, which is much easier. If it is short then it might be read.
But, I suggest saving phone calls for people you already know and who won't mind being interrupted.
And a long and tedious mail will get put on the back burner, maybe forever. Don't include CVs and such in the initial contact. Wait for a follow up request.

Actually, I would say it is fine to include a CV with an introductory e-mail. This saves the person you are contacting the effort of first having to ask for one, and is easily ignored if they are not interested.

Keep the email short. Do attach a CV (they can always choose not to read the attachment). And if you really like to have a phone call you could suggest that option in your email. I know some professors who prefer speaking to people over communicating by email, but only after an initial contact has been established. I do not know many people (professors included) who enjoy cold calls.

In this day and age, it is almost never appropriate to cold call anybody. This includes (but is certainly not limited to) any potential future employers.
Phone calls are a very intrusive way of trying to contact someone, and best reserved for urgent communication that requires an immediate reply. By choosing to cold call someone, you are effectively asserting that your call is urgent. When it turns out it is not (like enquirying about a potential future post-doc position) this is likely to annoy whoever it is that you are calling.
TL;DR Do not cold call people.

This is a horrible idea!
What is stopping you from emailing him/her?

Other answers advise against, which seems very reasonable.
Another option is; do it and pay attention to how people respond. This way you will learn by experience whether you think it's a good method or not for next time.

As an experimentalist I'm generally all for trying things to see what happens. However, while I'm not completely sure what will happen when I poke a bear with a sharp stick, I'm just not going to do it.

@JonCuster I agree that you have to have some boundaries with this approach. If someone was asking, 'I really want to steal people's phones should I do it or not?', I wouldn't advise trying it out to see what happens


text:
How should one navigate a "I currently do not have any open positions, that may change depending on grant applications" situation?
A prospective postdoc PI, after looking at my application and papers, told me "I currently do not have any open positions, although that may change depending on grant applications", afterwards he invited me to give a talk at a fancy seminar at his department and told me my work is "very impressive".
Assuming that I am the perfect fit for this lab and that I deliver a good talk:
How should I approach the issue of funding with this PI during my talk? What can I offer in order to convince him to find a way to hire me?

They don’t have funding yet. They may not get funding. You can’t offer anything to overcome those obstacles. You can only wait to see what happens, and keep looking elsewhere.

Without funding there is likely no way he can hire you. It isn't a matter of convince.
I'd suggest that you give the talk. If travel is involved, ask about reimbursement. Ask him when you should contact him again when he might know more. If you give the talk and he seems impressed then good, but you can also, perhaps, use him as a resource for finding another position elsewhere. He might know of colleagues in the same field that might consider you and might be able to recommend you to them if his funding is tentative or far off.
He can't expect you to wait around, so has incentive already to keep you informed.
If the talk is in person, try to arrange a meeting with the department head to enquire about other positions that might be open or about to open. Make it a multi-pronged attack. Or "hang around" the department and talk to a bunch of people. Who knows what might develop.

What can I offer in order to convince him to find a way to hire me?

Probably nothing.  It's already his job to find ways to hire postdocs.
You are approaching this backwards.  Instead of looking for PIs and hoping they have suitable funding, you should search the appropriate funding agency's grants database.  Identify who has received funding recently.  Then see if they are a suitable PI.


text:
Paper submitted to a Nature sub-journal with 3 weeks without updates, what can it mean?
I'm a postdoc working in the field of cancer genomics. Recently I submitted my work to a Nature sub-journal. It quickly went from "manuscript submitted" to "editor assigned" and "manuscript under consideration". But there was no updates since then. Now it's been 3 weeks since the status first changed to "manuscript under consideration". As a newbee in this forum I cannot attach pictures, so I just copied and pasted the manuscript tracking information in the system here:
Manuscript under consideration: 18th August 23
Editor Assigned: 18th August 23
Manuscript submitted: 17th August 23
Submission in process: 17th August 23
It seems that it's stuck at this stage. I heard that Nature and Nature sub-journals reject papers pretty quickly if it was a desk rejection (usually within one week). So it might be a good sign? Does this mean that my paper is still being considered by the editors? Or could it be because the handling editor is trying to contact reviewers but the reviewers are just too busy to reply?
Update: the manuscript was rejected ~20 days later, and the editor recommended us transferring our paper to Nature Communications. They had a discussion with the editorial board of Nature Communications, and told me that our paper met NC's standards to send out for revidw. I think they were pretty hesitant whether or not to send our paper out for review at their journal. NC is still a decent journal so we were happy to have our manuscript transferred there. Now it's being reviewed at NC.
Edit: longer-than-usual waiting time could mean the editor is not sure whether the submitted work is good enough for their standard. They might be having a broader discussion which takes time. Not a bad thing in the end. Just to share my data point. Thank all the repliers and wish you all the best along your way.

I’ve had a paper desk rejected after 6 months. 3 weeks is nothing in journal time. Just forget about it and continue the good work.

Oh dear 6 months... Yea I'd better not thinking of it any more. Thanks for sharing your story and hope everything goes well!

this is definitely not standard, but the point is it’s very hard to get any signal about how your paper is doing from the time it has been review. Sure, longer can mean better, but I’ve had papers accepted in top journals extremely fast (say 2.5 months).

Possible duplicate of: Is my paper under review (or similar) for too long and if yes, how should I react?.

@user3508551: Please do not make any generalisations on paper handling time as those vary considerably between fields and journals. Six months of handling time would be more than excessive for Nature (or any sub-journal thereof).

@Wrzlprmft where am I doing generalizations in my comment?

@Wrzlprmft That’s such a strange comment. If anything, I’ve done exactly the opposite of a generalization.

@user3508551: Your first comment suggests that handling times of six months are nothing special and you literally wrote “3 weeks is nothing in journal time” without any specifiers, which makes this general. Moreover whether intended or not, this is how your comment was understood.

@Wrzlprmft  I think my comment was clearly understood and provided the necessary context, you're reading too much. Unless your journal is a predatory journal, 3 weeks is objectively nothing for a journal, regardless what field it is.  I gave ample anecdotal evidence where 1) I had papers accepted after <2.5 months 2) Papers rejected after 6 months 3) Stated that this is unusual, essentially dismissing the idea that time gives signal on how your paper is doing. It's a strange hill to die on.

@user3508551: Unless your journal is a predatory journal, 3 weeks is objectively nothing for a journal, regardless what field it is. – Three weeks is the time some journals give their referees to review, including Nature.

@Wrzlprmft False and dishonest. It takes roughly 45 days for Nature to hear a first decision according to their own website. You know well that reviewing rarely stops after first decisions. I didn't say that nothing happens in 3 weeks, you're straw-manning. I really don't understand what you're doing here. My point, with the added context, is clear as daylight; 3 weeks since submission is nothing in the whole editorial process for any decent journal.

@user3508551: You seem to have a different understanding of “being nothing” than me (and dictionaries). If you say that a duration is nothing, it is typically understood that the duration is negligible in the given context; not merely smaller than typical. If you can expect to hear from the journal after 45 days (which happens after what is called the first decision), three weeks is roughly half of that time. That’s far from nothing.

My impression is that the Nature journals have become slower in general, and papers  now often sit with the editors for about 3 weeks. But I'm in a different field so YMMV.

There are many questions on this forum of the kind "What can I divine from [...]" about what it means that the editorial system shows some state for some period of time. The truth is that you can't know -- the paper is somewhere between the editor, the reviewer, the editorial team, and the systems do not show you real-time updates (such as reviews that may already have been uploaded). The only thing you can do is have patience and try to be productive with other things in the meantime!


text:
Why do individuals with revoked master’s/PhD degrees due to plagiarism or misconduct not return to retake them?
I’m curious about individuals who have had their master’s or PhD degrees revoked specifically for academic misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, exam misconduct), rather than personal misconduct, super ridiculous academic charges like data falsification, essay mill purchase for their dissertation,  or admission fraud. What factors prevent them from returning to the institutions that nullified their degrees to retake them? Are there institutional policies, personal barriers, or stigma involved?
Updated: I did some research, and I found some places that give the guilty person another chance to redo or here (section 4.5.4.) the work for example. However, not all institutions have the same policy

Much the same reason that people who have been to prison for embezzlement don’t usually go back to jobs as company accountants afterwards. Plagiarism in academia is misconduct every bit as serious as embezzlement in accounting.

What would they gain from returning? And, more importantly, what would the institution gain from admitting them back? None of the involved stakeholders has any incentives to repeat the exact same thing that led to a lot of drama the last time.

Plagiarism and academic misconduct are "super serious charges".

The value of a degree drops dramatically in most areas other than a select few industries very quickly. Couple that with plagiarism being far more common and acceptable outside of academia... I'd be more interested to know why people do go back to get it.

What's "super ridiculous" about data falsification...?

@xLeitix The things each party would potentially gain are exactly the things which incentivized the business arrangement in the first place. The relevant concerns regard the risks, not the potential gains, so the question is really whether the risks are too great to outweigh those gains.  I don't find this a priori obvious without recidivism data.  For all I know, the costs could even be negative, as in this parable (https://www.ssw.com.au/rules/do-you-give-people-a-second-chance/) implying Hoover trusts the mechanic more than one selected at random BECAUSE of the traumatic mark on his record.

Actually, I suspect that a few do. But I also suspect that the biggest obstacle isn't regulations, but the inability to find an advisor after academic misconduct. There may be regulations in some places, but I'm not specifically aware of them. I'd be very hesitant to take on a student who had engaged in such conduct in the past. It would take a lot of convincing.
It isn't stigma so much as the inability to trust such a person.
For doctoral students there is also the age issue. Starting over later in life is harder, though not impossible.
Some, though again not many, might be successful at a different institution or (age aside) after a pause. But a reputation for misconduct can stick.
People can change of course, but the path is hard and maybe long.

Also, presumably many such people wouldn't have needed to resort to plagiarism in the first place if they were capable of successfully earning their degree fair and square.

In my opinion, those who commit plagiarism think they might get away because 20 years ago, we didn't have many plagiarism detection tools. Right now, it's very hard for those who commit plagiarism to get away with it.

+1 for "inability to trust such a person". Science is a game of trust. For mid-level results, one does not have time to reproduce every detail. Unless it is an absolutely crucial result, which will be reproduced or of high innovation value, where one wants to gain skills pertaining to repeating this kind of work, one is - in principle - condemned to live with existing results. This requires a high level of trust. Violating it, intentionally is the ultimate scientific betrayal. Accepting a student who willingly did so is very risky, even if their remorse seems genuine.

Also, after 20 years of schooling, the willingness to jump back into that is likely to be very low for most people. Just playing a numbers game with these various data points, there are going to be very few in this situation who will successfully redo their theses.

@throwawayta I doubt many advisors or universities would consider "They won't plagiarize again because they won't get away with it" a good reason to re-admit someone. There are plenty of types of academic dishonesty that are hard to catch in the modern era - not to mention how plagiarism reflects on their ability to obtain a degree through real, original research.

I can come up with any number of reasons, including the following ones:

Why would an institution that has already revoked someone's degree once admit them again? In fact, why would any other institution do it? They've shown themselves to be ethically challenged. It's certainly a risk to admit them again.

Why would someone who lost their degree once try to regain it? Assuming they lost their job as well, then their academic career is over. Even if they obtained a degree again, nobody in their right mind would want to hire them again given their past behavior. So there is not much to be gained from going back to school.

More generally, going back to school for a degree once you're in or past mid-life (when these degree revocations happen) is much harder than when you're in your 20s. People have families, children, mortgages. It's hard to uproot your family to move back to a college town. It's also hard to live on a graduate student salary again once you have a family and children. Surely there are better ways to support your family than to be a graduate student again.

It's also hard to live on a graduate student salary again once you have a family and children. Surely there are better ways to support your family than to be a graduate student again. I know several graduate students with families and children who also work a separate full-time job, myself included. It just takes longer to finish your degree (unless your employer funds your research which I have also seen). You're right it's hard, but I have no problem supporting my family.

@imnotarobot Yes, surely it's possible -- many manage to do so. But I don't think any of what I said is wrong: It's hard, and there are easier ways to support a family.

At least in germany, for all examination rules I am aware of, the answer is that they are not allowed to.
The rules work roughly as follows: Certain failures of exams, theses, etc. invoke a process that allows you to make up for them in a repetition or similar, e.g., delivering a bad thesis. Others let you fail the entire programme, e.g., delivering a second bad thesis or academic misconduct.
A degree revocation usually is of the latter kind: The faculty concludes that you never (fairly) completed the programme but instead committed acts that lead to instant failure without an opportunity to make up for them – whether you are found out now or later. (Mind that there is a middle ground, where the conclusion is that the programme was neither completed nor failed the programme and you can pick up the pieces and continue, but my impression is that this rarely happens.)
Moreover, you cannot enrol or be examined if you already conclusively failed a programme in the same field (in Germany). For example if you are studying physics, and the programme’s rules say that you only have three attempts for the exam for a certain module, failing that exam for the third time bars you from studying physics not only at that university, but at any university in Germany for life. For PhD programmes, roughly any other PhD programme counts.

For masters and bachelor I agree with your fail-programme-once banned-afterwards statement, but for PhD I am sceptical. There is no such thing as a PhD programme (formally you just hand in your thesis at a faculty and then it is judged). One the other hand failing a PhD defense is extremely rare (or PhD being revoked). Do you have a quote or pointer to regulation that failing a PhD once will prevent you from handing in a PhD thesis elsewhere? After all each factulty makes their own rules with repect to granting a PhD (And I am not talking about practical issue, just the format requirements).

There is no such thing as a PhD programme (formally you just hand in your thesis at a faculty and then it is judged). – Even though handing in your thesis is the major official interaction in most PhD programmes, you do have to formally enrol as a PhD student at some point and restrictions can be placed on that. — After all each factulty makes their own rules with repect to granting a PhD – Indeed and hence “for all examination rules I am aware of”. It’s very difficult to make a statement applying to all PhD programmes, but in certain respects (such as this) surprises are rare.

Do you have a quote or pointer to regulation that failing a PhD once will prevent you from handing in a PhD thesis elsewhere? – For example, my faculty’s PhD rules state (§ 5.5): “Eine Bewerberin oder ein Bewerber, die oder der eine Promotion zur Erlangung des Grades Dr. rer. nat. bereits einmal endgültig nicht bestanden hat, kann nicht als Doktorandin oder Doktorand zugelassen werden.”

Somewhat of a counterexample: Göttingen Physics is far more ambiguous there: "In serious cases, the Examination Board may exclude the doctoral candidate from taking further examinations", see here.
I'd also note that one of Germany's most prominent cases, Guttenberg, got another PhD from Southampton in 2019 - so you can always try abroad.

@Anna_Mayo: Göttingen’s rule structure is rather convoluted, but at first glance PhD students have to sign on admission that “a corresponding doctorate has not been applied for at any other university in Germany or abroad; the submitted dissertation or parts of it have not been/will not be used for another doctoral project” (your link, Page 34, Point 4). It may be that you will allowed to modify that one though.

Some reasons come to my mind:

Financial issues: After working with a master's degree or PhD, you earn good money in industry and even politics. Going back for three years without or litte pay is impossible or at least a huge sacrifice.
The title is the entry ticket to land a good job. Once you have at least five years of experience and according references, there is no need to get the title. Even without a title the next employer is interested in the stuff you did in another position, not in some title from years back. Only for lawyers or medical stuff the title might be necessary to work in the actual job.
Academia requires a lot of patience and endurance. Industry is more pressured and short-lived. Publishing a paper, giving a talk at a conference, writing a grand is always a multi-month effort. In industry problems pop up, you solve them within days or weeks and move on. It might be difficult to change the style of working.
Why should an institution give second chance? There are so many people not having a first change to do real research. Why giving someone a second shot?


text:
Why does it take so long for journals/committees to detect fabricated data or theses after submission?
I'm curious about the retraction process of papers or theses due to fabrication or dishonesty. Specifically, why is it that some papers or theses are retracted years after publication? Why can't supervisors or reviewers detect signs of dishonesty or malpractice from the beginning? Are there specific issues or procedures that prevent early detection of such problems?

what research have you done on this topic? I would encourage you to look around sites like https://retractionwatch.com/ and do some research before posting a question.

I've actually been reading Retraction Watch for a long time, which has given me some insights into the retraction process. Recently, I noticed that a few academic papers I had been following were retracted, which surprised me and prompted me to delve deeper into why these issues weren't caught earlier. This motivated me to ask this question, as I believe there's more to learn about the detection process.

I imagine it has to do with inherently trusting authors.

Detecting fabricated data seems to mostly rely on noticing data issues over a number of papers.

Please consider editing your answer to link to the source's you're read

Would you spend your time, your energy, and your research funding to repeat every single the experimental results published in the peer-reviewed journals?
If not, then you get the answer.

Why does fraudulent data pass peer review?
Experimental results (where something gets measured) cannot be duplicated without strenuous effort beyond the scope of peer review. Only recently does the scientific community value the worth of repeating experiments as something publishable.
Even in Computer Science, it is difficult to repeat experiments if they involve lots of computation.
Many write-ups are not detailed enough. Only rather recently can papers provide links to additional data such as raw measurements, questionnaires, etc. Things like code review are extremely involved so that faulty experimental setups are not easily detected.
Reviewing a mathematical argument is arduous work and errors can be undetected. Often, the reviewer falls into the same logical trap as the original writer.
However, many errors get caught in the review process and the wider public does not see them at all. There is a survivor bias in action when one is complaining about retractions.
Why does the scientific community not detect false results?
Well, on the one hand, it does happen. On the other hand, science is done by specialists, and many publications are meant for specialists, so that not too many people read publications at a deep level.
If one works in a field like medicine with many error sources, where the results have immediate impact, then one's work is subjected to more scrutiny.
Why is it possible to defraud
The scientific process like most social processes assumes a certain level of trust. A Ph.D. supervisor might guide a Ph.D. student in setting up an experiment, but ultimately trusts that the reported results are not falsified and that the experimental setup was done with sufficient care. It is easy for a wicked student to report false, but believable results, as the supervisor does not have the time to repeat the experiment independently.
In some cases of intentional academic fraud, the perpetrators had already acquired a reputation of brilliance that made it difficult for co-authors and other collaborators to challenge their results. Only once an initial chink in the armor arose, results were doubted and their behavior was questioned by their collaborators. Many retractions and then dismissal procedures resulted.
Many fields of study need to use statistics, which does not generate absolute truth. The classical use of statistics declares a null-hypothesis to be untenable because the experimental results can be reconciled with the null-hypothesis only by assuming very unlikely luck. This procedure has known error rates so that a certain number of results obtained in this way are false. Thus, if a group of researchers generates many hypotheses, then some spurious statistically significant results follow. This is p-value hunting. Publishing potentially spurious results still gives academic credits.
Conclusion
The scientific process as of today has problems. One is the sheer volume of publications that makes it difficult to find good peer review. Competitiveness among participants is another problem as it tempts people into careless but fast work. From there it is only a short step to falsify results (instead of waiting for them to be obtained), and another short step to just making up data. Duplicating experiments and carefully reading others' result is not rewarded.

A Ph.D. supervisor might guide a Ph.D. student in setting up an experiment, but ultimately trusts that the reported results are not falsified and that the experimental setup was done with sufficient care -- https://www.theguardian.com/education/2002/sep/18/science.highereducation

To quote from that article: "If my student came to me with earth-shattering data, you wouldn't be able to pry me out of the lab," says Rice University's Douglas Natelson. "I'd be in there turning the knobs myself." [UCLA's James] Heath echoes this sentiment: "I'd sit down there to see how this is being done. I'd demand to see it several times."

This is a somewhat (?) naive answer, but when a deception is initially successful, passing the review of experts, then it seems unlikely to be uncovered quickly thereafter. More likely it will take someone else keenly interested in the topic who has already got some evidence that the stated results of the original research don't hold up. That implies the development of alternate ideas and gathering evidence, which takes time.
In some fields (math) errors can be more obvious and can be caught more quickly, but, even there, if the flaw escapes initial review it can, quite easily, pass unnoticed for a while.
In some other fields, those with intense current interest, such flaws might be more likely to be caught early, but not every paper triggers hard analysis.
Moreover, in yet other fields, where statistical measures provide the evidence, errors occur, with well defined probability, and it might take someone willing to try to replicate the results to come to a more accurate conclusion. That takes time as well, and doesn't have a many clear rewards as doing some other research.

I feel like this question suggests its own answer. Fraud is difficult to detect because, for obvious reasons, the fraudsters are attempting to cover their tracks. Unless you assume the fraudsters are incompetent (I would guess instead that most of them are extremely clever - they're capable of writing research articles after all), then you should also conclude that they are more likely to be successful than unsuccessful. Ergo, reviewers can't just "detect signs of dishonesty or malpractice from the beginning" unless they are much smarter than the fraudsters - much smarter, since they'd need to detect the fraud using only general knowledge, without firsthand experience with the specific experiment.
You also ask about the supervisor. Why can't the supervisor, who presumably has easy firsthand access to the experiment, detect fraud? There's some level of survivorship bias here, since when the supervisor detects fraud you probably don't hear of it. Another issue is, sometimes (perhaps even most of the time) it's the supervisor that's committing the fraud. See e.g. the short list of academic retractions on Wikipedia.


text:
How to tell a professor at a foreign university politely and impressively that I can’t cover the costs of living for my PhD?
When asking for an opportunity to do a PhD with a professor at a foreign university, he replied:

As a prerequisite you would need to take care of your own funding to cover the costs of your entire PhD project (4 years, cost of living, housing etc.). If you have such funds I would be happy to discuss with you the possibilities.

However, I don’t have any money to cover the cost of living. How can I answer him politely to impress him?

There is probably nothing to say. As I understand, his answer was really "I cannot have any funds for taking you as a PhD student". You could try @schester approach but I would not be too optimistic.

Where are you located? Can you apply for funding from some funds while you are at home?

The website of the university is an obvious place to check if there are any scholarships advertised there. You might be able to work as a TA in the department – this alone would likely not pay for everything, but it can supplement a barebones scholarship. Also, the government of your home country might offer scholarships to study abroad (such scholarships are usually prestigious and very competitive).

@svavil I'm from Iran.

@maryam: As you did not give any introduction to the background of the situation, I edited your question to include what I consider to be implied by the context. Please check whether everything is accurate and according to your intentions.

Yes as per Alexandros: the Prof is saying he has nothing for you. He'd be amazed if you came back and said "I'm happy to work for free for 4 years of my life".

Informative reading on self-funding: http://academia.stackexchange.com/search?q=self+fund+phd

The answers below cover all your possibilities. I would just add (and do not take this as a criticism, this is maybe a communication issue as English is not my first language) that extraordinary claims ("impressing") need extraordinary evidence. Except if you have a spectacular record of papers and extremely interesting ideas for the future, the "impressing" part will not work. This is particularly true if you want to claim that you will be hard working, learn easily etc.

Adam Davis has pretty much summed it up below, but if you cannot show that you have funding for your living expenses, then you may not even be able to get a student visa to enter the country.

why would answering politely impress him? that shouldn't be your goal ...

I think the way to impress this professor is to say "I found a big chunk of funding."  In general, being poor is unimpressive.

I don't think "impress him" means what you think it means.

@maryam I have a relevant advice rather than an answer: you could look around for scholarships offered by 3rd parties (maybe also ask him if he knows of any organizations that could offer one). Sometimes there are scholarship programs that are made specifically for people from the developing world, or specifically for women. Look for those scholarships and figure out everything (deadlines, required documents etc..) and contact the professor stating that you plan to apply for that scholarship, if this works out he'll get himself a "free" PhD student, which will definitely impress him :)

They have made up their mind. Find another one.

As a prerequisite you would need to take care of your own funding to cover the costs of your entire PhD project (4 years, cost of living, housing etc.). If you have such funds I would be happy to discuss with you the possibilities.

This is the professor's polite way of saying, "We do not have funding to support you as a student.  If you obtain your own funding let's discuss further, otherwise there is little reason to continue this discussion."

I don’t have any money to cover the cost of living.

Then the appropriate response is, "Thank you for your time and consideration.  Please keep me in mind if a funded position opens up in the future."

How can I answer him politely to impress him?

It sounds as though you'd like to respond in a way that causes him to allocate cost of living expenses to you.  I doubt the likelihood of that - if there are funded positions available, professors typically allocate them and notify students for them first, then once the positions are filled notify those that didn't make it that they have none available, and self funding would be the only option.  So chances are good that he simply has no funding to afford taking you on as an expense for their program.  It's also possible that they don't fund PhD students at all in their program.
However, if you have some knowledge that they do have funding and are simply not impressed enough by what you've presented so far to allocate some for you, then your options are limited.  You need to sell yourself and help them understand that your ability, talent, and skills are well above average and would be an asset to them that would be worth paying for.
How you would do that really depends a lot on your program and area of study.  Further, if you had more to show them, you should have done so well before this point.  Trying this now once they've already made their decision has a lower chance of success than impressing them when you first apply.
All that said, there's another option you might want to consider: bring your own funding with you.  It's not easy, but you may be able to write a successful grant proposal for them that gets them the funding they would need to fund the first part of your PhD.  You may have to do this a few times during your time there to continue your education.  Honestly, this method also has its risks, as they would have to cooperate, and they would have to allocate the funds received - not all of which would go to your education.
If this educational institution is particularly important to you and you have to get into their program, you might consider some of these options.  You might, instead, have a better chance with a different institution, though.  Lastly, it's reasonable to take a year or two off from education, get a job, and save money.  Industry experience in your field can be quite valuable to some PhD programs and might give you a leg up on the competition the next time you apply, and if not you should be able to bring some self-funding to the table.  In some industries you may be able to make contacts and network with people in a way that makes you more valuable.
Don't get too caught up in having what you want right now - getting a PhD later in life isn't a disadvantage.  It's more important to have good evidence - research, papers - of your skills than it is to have done it earlier.

Put more strongly: This is the professor's way of saying that they don't really want you.  Look elsewhere.

@jeffe I don't think that this is true in general. Some professors really do not have funding. I myself would use a different phrasing (at least I would drop the "happy" or even the whole last sentence).

@JeffE This is definitely not necessarily true. Without knowing the country there is really nothing to say. Certainly in the UK, most PhD students that I have found have funding coming from sources that are not the supervisor - whilst the supervisor would (normally) help with funding application they often do not have funding themselves.

@ssmart if the professor wanted the OP, the professor could have referred OP to possible funding sources.

I think we're picking at nits here.  We cannot determine the level of desire the professor has for the OP given what was written.  We can suppose one way or another, but if you believe you have a valid interpretation of the professor's response that would help the OP, please submit an answer rather than arguing about differing interpretations in comments.

@JeffE: I would only say that if the professor is in a field / country where most students are funded, which is certainly not all of them.

@Dirk the mere presence and wording of that sentence gives me the impression that it is true to some extent.

Look for a different opportunity
As the original mail states, they are not offering you funding and own funding is a prerequisite - this means that if you can't cover those costs, then the discussion is over, and it is worthwhile to discuss any other details only "if you have such funds", as per the original response.
This doesn't mean that you should abandon the issue - however, it does mean that you should look for PhD opportunities in other universities that may have funding available for you.

I think you mean it is not worthwhile to discuss any other details?

@reirab clarified that sentence.

Unfortunately, there is not much to say to him/her. Professor, is pretty much clear that responsibility of costs of living is up to you to resolve,
You can ask him if he knows any funds that you can apply, or if uni have special fund for this kind of situations, or to check by yourself if you are entitled to any kind of social benefit, security, welfare? worth checking,

+1. I would even say that the OP has been fortunate that the professor is so open at this stage. It would actually be worse to have long discussions, and perhaps even acceptance on a PhD programme only to discover later that it isn't funded and have to turn it down. My University certainly also required proof of funding after acceptance so this isn't unusual either. @maryam, by all means ask the professor about funding opportunities, but it sounds like you'll have to look elsewhere, and that's not a reflection on you, that's just life. At least you found out earlier rather than later.

yes, I agree with you @zelanix I am not sure if you are referring to USA system, as far as I know most PhD positions in Europe are similar to employment contract. I am not quite sure why OP apply directly, even though maryam dont have sufficient amount of money to cover cost of living. Personally, I find OP action strange, but doesn't necessary mean that it is wrong what OP did. maryan next move should be to find appropriate fellowship and grant to cover that kind of expenses, or a sponsor

As someone who has to respond to similar requests regularly, the statement seems quite unambiguously to be read the following way: the recipient is "happy to discuss the possibilities" - which means, they do not brush you off entirely. However, they do not have the money to fund you, and it is likely that they would have pointed you to a local funding opportunity if they had one they could offer you.
So, either you bring your own money (which means, either being self-funded, which is usually not ideal, as it puts you in a weak position, or getting some studentship from your country, club, network, which is usually better - especially if the studentship involved an element of competition, e.g. nation-wide, as it shows that you were considered worthy of passing a money-worthy hurdle).
There are no "magic words" that would work to "impress"; if you have publications, grants, achievements (e.g. successful participation in relevant competitions), relevant business experience (e.g. tech startup if in a technical field etc.), or similar, these can work in your favour. However, they should have been in the CV in the first place. If you sent no CV on first contact, then a mail highlighting some of these achievements (brief!) may also help to kindle additional interest.
Be careful not to "nag", though. Sometimes, if the biography is strong enough or close enough to their interests, they will ask you themselves to continue being in touch in case a funding opportunity appears. However, make sure you look also for other opportunities, don't lock in on only this one.

Already well covered.. but I'll throw in my 2 cents.
1) This is probably not a sign that the prof "doesn't want you" as some are saying.  If they didn't want you they would not have written to offer to begin with.  They simply don't have funding to cover living expenses.
2) The suggestions of seeing if there's any way to get money in the area is the best suggestion I think.  Appealing to the professor is unlikely to help, they simply don't have the money or they'd already let you know they could chip in on expenses.   But, see the next paragraph -- I would ask the prof what he knows about the available student jobs, most universities have quite a few that pay well enough to cover expenses.
Besides the regular jobs you may find anywhere (or not, depending on the local economy) like waiter/waitress, dishwasher, working at a grocery store or gas station, etc., universities also tend to have their own student jobs.  Some secretarial jobs, some laboratory jobs (either directly running the experiments if it's in your topic of study, or washing/trying test tubes, laying out equipment so it's ready to run the experiments, etc. otherwise.)  Also TA "Teachers Assistant" jobs, which amount to interacting with a professor's students on the professor's behalf.  The professor (almost) always teaches the class... but beyond that, some professors keep extensive office hours to talk to students and rely less on TAs, some professors really want to only do research, do teach the required number of classes but have TAs do literally everything else.

This is true, but it should be noted that TA jobs are usually considered a form of departmental funding.  If the department had TA positions available to the OP, the letter from the professor would have mentioned this opportunity.  The fact  that it said "you must self-fund" suggests to me that the professor does not expect TA positions  to be available to this student.

If the professor did want the student, the reply would be more along the lines of, "I don't have funding available but I'll try to find some. Also, is there any possibility that you could fund yourself?"

This isn't an "offer" -- it's a prelude to a discussion.

I disagree that your professors response is saying 'go away, we dont want you' (it is one of the possibilities, but there are many others).
So, depending on whether you are a 'cup half empty' or 'cup half full' kind or person, you can reply in multiple ways.
(DONT DO THIS!) Cup half empty: give up and answer: 'I cant afford cost of living, thanks for clarifying'
But being a 'cup half full' kind of guy, I would be tempted to look for the positives and do some research into finding a sponsor for your phd (outside of professor).
Have a look at companies that are doing the same sort of research your phd is covering. Even better, what companies would find your research beneficial in business?
Once you find a few, contact them and basically sell yourself and your skills to them. If they finance some or most of your cost of living, they could get you as a employee/future researcher after your PhD.
That way, you can go back to your professor with a response turning his negative answer into a positive - at worst case, you can show him you have tried to do something for yourself - which will impress him!

As a prerequisite you would need to take care of your own funding to
  cover the costs of your entire PhD project (4 years, cost of living,
  housing etc.). If you have such funds I would be happy to discuss with
  you the possibilities.

This response sets off alarm bells for me. The reply does not refer to outside academic funding/grants, but specifically "if you have such funds". I had a friend of foreign descent who said that college officials where he went (in U.S.) always assumed that students from the Middle East were wealthy princes by default (e.g., bursar always surprised he didn't pay his bills fully in cash). Also, I had an extended family member (in U.S.) who I think poorly chose to reveal that they didn't have undergraduate debt, and thus in the PhD program was given less support, and ultimately had to leave the program unsuccessfully after several years.
In my limited experience, self-funding does not give the institution the incentive to actually graduate the student, and it sounds like this is what the professor in question may be fishing for.
Some prior questions on self-funding:

I am able to self-fund a PhD, how can I use this when applying?
Will self funding a PhD hurt employment chances?

i don't think the prof is fishing for anything. OP specifically requested the opportunity, and the school doesn't have funds for any more phd students. the prof is offering a solution for if the student still really wants to enroll in the program.

Anybody who thinks that Iran is full of wealthy princes obviously didn't notice that the Iranian monarchy was overthrown more than 35 years ago. I think you're reading far too much into the words "If you have such funds": nothing there says personal wealth and I would interpret it as talking about funds from anywhere including, for example, scholarships from the asker's government and other organizations that fund students.

I also suspect that your friend's experiences were based on students from Middle Eastern countries typically paying bills in cash in the experience of the college officials he met and that the "wealthy princes" thing was a borderline-racist (or, at least, culturally insensitive) joke, rather than a statement of their literal beliefs about people from the Middle East.

I've met a lot of PhDs that were self-funded - that is not that they paid from their own pockets ("princes"), but that they had secured independent government funding, such as CSC scholarships from China.

Apparently the professor / university is not able or willing to cover these costs.
I would look for ways to fund this myself first.
Depending on countries of origin / study and personal student situation there may be programs designed to help.
If own research doesn't turn up something or if there is hope that the university may provide assistance the professor or university can be involved as well.
They know students are at the beginning of their professional career and have limited funding usually, so the very least they'd be sympathetic and willing to give pointers.
An obvious route is also to take on part time work while abroad.

By accepting all earlier comments and answer I would like to add that
What is Phd domain? and which country is it? Considering earlier dimensions of conflicts between Iran and West particularly USA, a professor may not want to find himself in such a position where he/she helps a student not only in Phd but for finding funding too.
To impress him and reach almost to a miracle;
you could show how extraordinary you are through some theory developments, publications etc.

This is unnecessarily negative regarding the effects of larger geopolitics on individual faculty. I've taken on students from the Middle East (including Iran) because I know that now and in the future, we need more connections and understanding between our citizenry and scientific organizations.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
PhD planning concern
I'm in my third year of PhD. However, I'm still bad at planning. I find myself spending more time on things that are not part of my PhD. For example, I may read books such as self help books and not read papers that are more important for my Phd.
How can I handle this and overcome it?

There's a logically correct but kind of silly answer, which is... focus on getting better with planning. Carve out some time where you will focus on your PhD studies. Spend a half hour or something in the morning with a cup of coffee planning all the things you will do, critically evaluate whether that thing does or does not help you on your PhD, and then stick to your plan as closely as possible. Unexpected tasks can come up, but don't let yourself get lost on tangents that aren't related to your work. It isn't always easy to be self-disciplined, but it is achievable if you take it seriously and don't accept excuses from yourself.
If you find the above paragraph insightful, and you're able to implement the suggestions and it fixes your woes, then I guess that's all that needs to be said.
However... I suspect you already know this, and I wonder if the behavior you are seeing is really a symptom of a deeper issue. Why aren't you motivated to work on your PhD tasks? Are you happy? When did this behavior start? There are many resources online for struggling PhD students, for example articles like this one or this one where PhD students describe common feelings where you may recognize things you are going through; online support groups (here is an example -- I am not vouching for this site in particular, but just to show there are groups you can find online). If you have people you are close with in your program or lab, or if you feel safe discussing with your advisor, you can try talking to them.
Regardless of what else you try, I strongly recommend that you also seek out the help of a mental health professional. (So strongly I am putting this into a new paragraph). At least in the US where I went to school, most universities have on-campus mental health resources where you can see a counsellor at no cost to you. In my opinion, understanding and dealing with underlying issues is more likely to get to the root of what's going on, than telling yourself to "plan better."


text:
Can degree students be forced to speak in classes (answering targeted questions,etc) and be forced to sit in a particular way?
I'm a first year degree student in a college affiliated with the OU. Can the teachers force me to write and maintain neat running notes, tell me how to sit (I keep my legs crossed), which seat to sit in or force us to participate during class?
Can they force us to attend classes (by yelling, talking to us condescendingly or even by threatening us)? Can they link running notes to semester internals? I'm new to this, and this all seems overly controlling to me.

I've made some changes to your questions. However, right now, there is a lack of focus (too many questions). Try to rephrase it to focus on the 'controlling' question and use the other questions as examples. Also, I don't know what the OU is and whether that is relevant, so please edit this into your question if this matters. I also don't know what running notes or semester internals are, and if/how they are relevant.

"Can they force us to attend classes" depends on your individual situation. For example, international students in the UK are required by the government to have a certain number of contact hours per week, and institutions are meant to record and enforce this.

@user1729 If this is the UK, then OU would normally be the Open University, which would have no contact time, being a remote institution. The reference to "colleges" makes me thing that OU might be Oxford university, where i would think that attendance at tutorials, if not lectures is definitely enforced (when i was at Cambridge, we had to pay for the tutors time if we missed a tutorial without a good excuse).

OU in this context very likely refers to Osmania University.

IIRC, showing the bottoms of your feet to another person is considered deeply insulting in some cultures. I don't know whether it applies to shoes as well.

Can the teachers force me to write and maintain neat running notes
Can they link running notes to semester internals

In general no, but if this is a course on how to study effectively, then part of the course is writing and maintaining neat running notes and that would have to be part of the grade.

tell me how to sit

In general no, unless what you are doing is disruptive. The difficulty is that what is disruptive is subjective.

which seat to sit in

Now with COVID we have to control who sits where, especially make sure that distance is maintained.

force us to participate during class

Active participation is part of the grade in many of my classes. So yeah, absolutely.

Can they force us to attend classes

Yes, the extend to which this can happen depends. In some institutions there are certain justifications necessary, e.g. to learn how to work in a lab you have to attend the lab... In other institutions every class can be compulsory. Most are somewhere in between.

by yelling, talking to us condescendingly or even by threatening us

That can be serious, and deserves a question in its own right. So I am not going to discuss this here as part of this long list.

In the question it is at the end of the list and in parentheses, indicating it is not important to the OP. It is also very different from the other elements. Answering it together with the other elements does not do it justice.