[CJefferson]

I agree, you seem to be claiming to be an expert on something.

"PhD by publication" is a specific thing, it's in italics in the previous post.

My Universities offer a "PhD by publication". You basically staple together a bunch of your publications, and write a brief intro. It saves you writing a full PhD document. But, the standard on those publications is quite high -- you certainly wouldn't get one from preprints to arxiv at any University I've ever worked at.

Of course, you can get a PhD with no publications, just write a good PhD. Lots of students do taht.

[almostgotcaught]

Did you know that there are universities outside of Europe? And that in those universities, "3 publications plus intro and conclusion for a PhD" is also called (usually) PhD by publication (sometimes it is called a kitchen-sink PhD). And my point was that that rule of thumb does not apply to theory students.

Note the italics please.

So I'm sorry you're right I'm not in expert in Europe's monopoly on the phrase "PhD by publication" but who would want to be an expert in trivial bs like that (answer: apparently you and the other guy!)

[CJefferson]

Maybe in a few days come back and re-read this thread. Maybe you are having a bad day, I don't know.

You are the one who started talking about people not being experts in having a PhD by publication. No-one else (including me) has bought up that they are an expert on that topic.