Correspondence

Dear Semjon Adlaj, This email serves as a confirmation that your message below was sent to Advances in Mathematics. Please do not reply to this email. --- Dear Editors of Advances in Mathematics: I'm an author of the article "The Galois top and its motion invariant" submitted on 11 June 2024. I have cyclically permuted the first three references in the bibliography of my article in order to maintain a chronological order. The latest version (as of October 22, 2024) is available here: https://semjonadlaj.com/SP/Invariance.pdf. The difference from the version which is in possession of your journal is not significant enough for sending a revised version. Thank you, Semjon Adlaj https://SemjonAdlaj.com/

A video presentation (from April 17, 2024) where the concept of the Galois top was first ever introduced: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=elk_NFrrElo&list=PLHvQ40n5uHI_Fq9DmeUAjXw0PZdjjmUn1&index=27&pp=iAQB

Dear Prof. Esnault, I must assume that my article, which details are provided below, was lost somewhere in the transition from the former editing office since it has been silent for over a year (which followed the receipt of the second revised version)! I would appreciate informing me of the current status of my article and whether you prefer me sending its third version (which is currently unavailable to the AiM journal) to you or elsewhere. I kindly thank you and wish you the best, Semjon Adlaj

Dear author, am not an editor of Advanced in Mathematics. You should direct your request to the editors there. Best, He Sent from my iPhone

Please forward my message below to the current editor of the AiM journal (for which the current third version of my article is unavailable).

Hello! Thank you for contacting Elsevier Researcher Support. To help us jump right into the solution, please ensure you have provided as much information as possible. While you wait, you can take a look at our Journal Article Publishing Support Center where you can review FAQs and 'how to' videos. To help ensure a fast response, please do not change the subject line of this email when replying. For any future correspondence, remember to quote your unique reference number provided in the subject line. Regards, Elsevier Researcher Support

Dear Dr. Adlaj, Thank you for reaching out to us and please accept my sincerest apologies for the late response. This is to confirm the receipt of your e-mail. Your request is currently being handled. You'll receive regular updates on the progress of your query, right through until resolution. Please respond to this e-mail if you have any further questions or information to add. In the meantime, your utmost patience and kind understanding is highly appreciated. Kind regards, Kristina Cuestas Researcher Support Agent ELSEVIER

Dear Dr. Semjon Adlaj, Thank you for your inquiry on the submitted revised paper 240611-Adlaj. I've checked and noticed that the previous round referee had declined to review this paper; however, editors often contact other referees and experts outside of the system so there may be further activity beyond what is shown. I have sent a reminder to the handling editor and requested an update on this paper. I will keep you informed as soon as I receive a response. I appreciate your continued patience and support throughout the editorial process. If you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards, Dinesh Vinayagam Journal Manager ELSEVIER | Operations | Journal Operations

Dear Dinesh, I know too well why that referee declined to review my revised paper (which I sent on September 18, 2024). Much more strongly he would have declined to review its current version (as of November 20, 2025), which I am hesitant to send to the AiM journal, for its much clearer conclusion and its far-reaching implications. The outdated version (of my article) which the AiM journal possesses now is no longer the version permitted for public announcement and publication. The version which in my possession now (and nowhere else) is. I would appreciate letting me know whether the AiM journal is interested in receiving and reviewing the publishable version of my article without further delay. No less I would appreciate letting me know if the AiM journal is not eager to further review my article so that I would simplify the issue for both sides by withdrawing my article from the AiM journal in order to publish it elsewhere. I thank you kindly for keeping me posted. Semjon Adlaj

Dear Dr. Semjon Adlaj, I can understand your situation and the delay in the review process. However, we need to wait for the editor's response if they have invited referees outside the editorial system or not. Please do send me a follow-up email if you have not received any response from me on or before November 28, 2025. Regards, Dinesh Vinayagam Journal Manager ELSEVIER | Operations | Journal Operations

Dear Dinesh, Thank you for informing me of the date when I ought to expect a clarification. Meanwhile, I would appreciate informing me of the name of the editor who has been assigned to my article and/or the one you have been corresponding with. Regards are mutual, Semjon Adlaj

Dear Dr. Semjon Adlaj, Thank you for your email. Please be informed that it is against Elsevier policy to reveal the editor's name to authors; hence, if you have any queries that you wanted to clarify with the editor, please do let me know and I will share it with the editor and get this clarified. Regards, Dinesh Vinayagam Journal Manager ELSEVIER | Operations | Journal Operations

Dear Dinesh, That is a rather strange policy. So then let the handling editor know that the current (third version) of my article is currently UNAVAILABLE to the AiM journal. However, its assessment by the neural network DeepSeek is now available at: https://chat.deepseek.com/share/q7tdfnepodq7keaazn

Dear Dr. Semjon Adlaj, I can understand your situation and the delay in the review process. However, we need to wait for the editor's response if they have invited referees outside the editorial system or not. Please do send me a follow-up email if you have not received any response from me on or before November 28, 2025. Regards, Dinesh Vinayagam Journal Manager

On 28 Nov 2025, at 12:27, Semjon Adlaj wrote: A promise made is a promise kept on November 28.

Happy New Year, dear Dinesh! May I kindly remind you that I am still anticipating a competent second review of my article, which I made conveniently accessible via my professional home page. - The Galois top and its motion-invariant. This is a 15-page third version of an article whose second version was made temporarily available to the AiM journal after deeming results (presented in the first version) to be "certainly worth publishing."

Dear Dr. Semjon Adlaj, Thank you for your inquiry on the submitted revised paper 240611-Adlaj - "The Galois top and its motion invariant." I have reviewed the current status of your manuscript. The handling editor invited a new referee on December 16, 2025, to provide the final advice regarding the next steps in the editorial process. There has been no response from the referee until this date. I have requested the handling editor to send a personal reminder to the referee to expedite the process. As you are aware, this is the holiday season, and responses may be delayed. Nevertheless, I expect to see progress on your manuscript in the coming weeks. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards, Dinesh Vinayagam Journal Manager ELSEVIER | Operations | Journal Operations

Dear Dinesh, Thank you for informing me of the invitation of a new referee. And as you surely recall, I NO longer permit publishing the SECOND version of my article which the AiM journal currently possesses. The article's publishable version, of which both the handling editor and the referee are to be aware, is the THIRD version which I attach to this letter for your and their convenience. Please let me know as soon as you forward the attached third version to the handling editor and the referee, since it has NOT been made available via the automated system (so they cannot download it otherwise). The Hess top, in particular, is included in the third version ONLY. And its inclusion in the attached THIRD version must be emphasized to the referee BEFORE receiving his review. Regards are mutual, https://SemjonAdlaj.com/

Dear Dr. Semjon Adlaj, Thank you for letting me know. I've forwarded the attached third version file to the handling editor, and I believe the editor will replace the outdated file in EditFlow or send it to the referee directly. Regards, Dinesh Vinayagam Journal Manager ELSEVIER | Operations | Journal Operations

Dear Dinesh, Please forward this technical message (which is specifically tailored for the AiM journal) to both the editor and the referee of my article: https://chatgpt.com/s/t_6961d568341481919b258fbbed9d8912 It is rather significant in emphasising a key concept of my article, that is, a canonical (non-classical) phase space which was traditionally (but wrongly) omitted from consideration in rigid body dynamics investigation. I believe that this technical note provides a substantial aid to the referee in the final assessment of my article, so I would appreciate acknowledging the action of its forwarding (as the EditFlow has not been updated with the third version of my article, which you kindly forwarded). I would also appreciate any feedback concerning the expected dates of finalizing the second review of my article.

Dear Dr. Semjon Adlaj, Thank you for your inquiry on the revised paper 240611-Adlaj. I've forwarded your email to the Managing Editor of this journal because I've not received any response from the handling editor, and I requested to expedite the editorial process of your paper. I will keep you informed as soon as I receive a response from the Managing Editor. I appreciate your continued patience and support throughout the editorial process. If you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards, Dinesh Vinayagam Journal Manager ELSEVIER | Operations | Journal Operations

Dear Dr. Semjon Adlaj, Thank you for your patience. I've been informed by the handling editor that he invited another referee because all the invited referees declined the review invitation, and I hope you will see some progress in the coming weeks. Regards, Dinesh Vinayagam Journal Manager

Dear Dinesh, Thank you for keeping me posted. Please convey my next message to the handling editor. I do not blame the referees for declining to review my article, especially if the referees are representatives of the so-called "Kolmogorov school." Indeed, they rightfully feel that my article delivers a strike, targeting their "chaotic" ideology which has become no less "popular" nowadays than "random mutations" and "big bang", respectively primitively "explaining" biological diversity and the origin of space-time.

Dear Dinesh, Are you able to confirm that the third version of my article is being forwarded for the second review? I have to ask you this since the THIRD version has NOT been made available via EditFlow, whereas the second version (of September 18, 2024) of my article (which is available via EditFlow) is NO longer the publishable version. You might ensure that the handling editor is possessing the third version by comparing it with the one conveniently accessible at my professional webpage here: https://semjonadlaj.com/SP/Invariance.pdf

Dear Dr. Semjon Adlaj, Thank you for bringing this to my attention that your third version is still not appearing in EditFlow. I've now uploaded your third version files in EditFlow. Please feel free to contact me in case of any further questions or concerns. Regards, Dinesh Vinayagam

Dear Dinesh, I have verified the correct spelling of the name "Evgeny" and corrected it in the next (attached 251225) version of my article, which I would appreciate you uploading to your editorial system. Has a second referee (not representing "the Kolmogorov school") been assigned to my article?

Dear Dr. Semjon Adlaj, Thank you for sending the fourth version of the manuscript files for your article 240611-Adlaj. I've now uploaded the latest version of this file in EditFlow. Regarding the second referee, the revised files have now been sent to the referee, and we have requested advice again. I hope you will see some progress in the coming weeks. Please feel free to contact me in case of any further questions or concerns. Regards, Dinesh Vinayagam Journal Manager

Dear Dinesh, Thank you for uploading the version with the spelling correction and for forwarding it to the second referee. I would like to emphasize that I'll be happy to provide any additional clarifications to the reviewer of my paper even before the final report.

Dear Dinesh, As you know, the second version which was sent to your journal on September 18, 2024, was no longer permitted for publication and was recently replaced with the third version (thanks to you). Please note that the title of the third version was modified to contain the term "motion-invariant." The second version had instead "motion invariant" (without hyphenation). As you see, the hyphen here serves its hidden purpose of making a clear distinction between a version which was no longer permitted for publication and the version which you kindly forwarded. Yet, may I kindly emphasize today (on the 17-month anniversary of revising my article, as requested by its first referee) that there are no indications whatsoever that the third version of my article was received by any other referee of your journal (whether internal or external). I would much appreciate an acknowledgment of receiving the third version if its detailed review must be (for whatever reason) further postponed. And, as I have already said, I would be happy to provide additional clarifications as necessary. Regards, S.

Dear Dr. Semjon Adlaj, Thank you for your explanation regarding the rejected article 240611-Adlaj. I've forwarded your email to the handling editor and will keep you informed as soon as I receive a response. Regards, Dinesh Vinayagam Journal Manager

Dear Dinesh, Thank you for controlling and ensuring that the editors are abiding by the declared journal policy. Certainly, my article is no less than a disaster to the "Kolmogorov school" and its representatives worldwide (which is, of course, precisely why a fair review is essential—not for me, but for the journal's reputation), so rejecting my article would hardly surprise me. Yet, after 17 months of deafeningly loud silence (evenly emanating from the three managing editors) which was broken (only thanks to your demands), journal policy would appear to require a second (professional) review—one which would (hopefully for them) refute the highly positive first review of my article, which was revised accordingly and then had its third version (with the modified title) posted by you. So, I need that required (as per journal policy) second review of the third (not second) version of my article. As you see, dear Dinesh, people too often (regardless of their position) tend to act irresponsibly once they feel that no control has been exerted upon them. So let us keep going and bring our saga to its honest conclusion.

Dear Dinesh, I know you have done your part responsibly, so let me just acknowledge your contribution at my professional webpage for the world to see and distinguish. **The Galois top and its motion-invariant.** This is a 15-page third version (2025.11.07) of an article that was assessed by two neural networks: ChatGPT & DeepSeek. The second version (2024.09.18) of the article was met with a deafening silence, evenly emanating from three editors (Michael J. Hopkins, Tomasz Mrowka & Gang Tian) of the AiM journal, after its first version (2024.06.11) was deemed to be "certainly worth publishing." Their silence was successfully broken (after 17 months) by the Journal Manager at Elsevier Operations, Dinesh Vinayagam, with a hardly surprising rejection letter of February 17, 2026, claiming that a mathematical physicist would not be able to tell what is interesting about this "note," which contains "no theorems" and "should belong in a physics journal." As you see, I have exploited the response of the editors of the AiM for further promotion of my article. Let me know if you ever need a letter of recommendation to attest to your honesty, while a few others were indecently hiding behind you. Best wishes, S.

Dear Dr. Semjon Adlaj, Thank you for your email requesting an update on the rejected paper 240611-Adlaj. I've now sent a follow-up email to the handling editor, copying the Managing Editor, and will keep you informed as soon as I receive a response. Regards, Dinesh Vinayagam Journal Manager ELSEVIER | Operations | Journal Operations

I thank you greatly, dear Dinesh!

Dear Dr. Semjon Adlaj, Thank you for your patience. I've been informed by the handling editor that the 'Reject' decision stands and the final decision cannot be rescinded. I am sorry that I could not help you in this regard, and I regret any inconvenience this has caused. If you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards, Dinesh Vinayagam Journal Manager ELSEVIER | Operations | Journal Operations

Dear Dinesh, There is nothing for you to feel sorry about. The sorrow is mine, as the handling editor, instead of emailing me directly, is giving you an answer to a question that I did not ask. So I kindly ask you not to forward any email from me to any "handling editor" after you have successfully broken that loudly screaming silence of all managing editors of the AiM, forcing them to write that expected rejection letter which they hoped would never be published. Now that their "official" response has been made public, they might prefer to resort back to their silent mode. They might also advise that talkative "handling editor" to refrain from making subsequent comments, which will unnecessarily further expose them publicly. Feel free to answer me if you wish, but never feel obliged to forward my personal letter to you to any handling or managing editor, who are no longer entitled to make any assessments of my article. Here I must also declare that my article must be erased from any of their personal devices, and they are no longer allowed to discuss it with any referees, either internal or external representatives of the "Kolmogorov school" from Princeton or elsewhere.