The odds are very good they'll let you do it. They have nothing to gain by sending a badly-formatted manuscript for review. You could even submit the correct version as a separate submission now and the most that'll happen is some minor inconvenience for the journal staff (this is when the duplicate submission flag kicks in).
Worst case scenario, you can ...
This is going to depend on how the journal is set up, but two suggestions:
Suggest in the cover letter that Editor A handle your manuscript.
When asked to classify your manuscript choose keywords that closely match Editor A's expertise. (You probably are doing this already anyway.)
Note that it's not a guarantee that Editor A handles your manuscript even ...
You can work with anyone you like who will also work with you, so yes. Whether the paper can be published depends on the journal editor and reviewers, which depends, in turn, on the quality and novelty of the paper.
There are no real barriers to doing research. There are no real barriers (maybe a bit of money is needed) for submitting a paper. In ...
It depends on the type of document that you are preparing.
In (most) conference papers, you have a lot more freedom on the placement of images and equations so you can have your equation at the top of a page and images in the middle. Considering, however, that equations are part of the normal text, it is not best practice to do so. Also, if you are using ...
No editor will care (or for that matter could know) about your degree. What matters is the contents of the submission, and if it meets the standard of the journal. There are plenty of chemists or electrical engineers who publish in physics journal, plenty of physicists who publish in chemistry or engineering or math journals.
Yes, you can publish provided that the editor and the reviewers accept your paper, perhaps after revision. There are no "credentialing" requirements to publish in a field.
Some people are just self taught and rise to a high level. It is true, however, that the reviewers may look at your lack of degree and decide to be extra vigilant. But they should be ...
First, thank you to the people that responded.
Actually, I was very anxious about the grant application but after reading your responses I just let the paper go through the process. It really was a short period of time to ask and I probably would have received a pre-written e-mail with no useful information.
In April 20th I received the answer: "...
If the review itself is not signed, it sounds like the unblinding was not deliberate. I would:
Reply as if the review were anonymous
Notify the editor in a separate, private message saying there may have been an error in showing the reviewer name
Ask the editor.
Probably it is a mistake, but it is not your fault. I do not expect this to be to your detriment (and they might already have noticed it themself) and you seem to have a dilemma what to do.
I would personally start wrapping my head around the idea that you will (a) not get the "clear and concise" explanation from the Editor-in-Chief that you are hoping for, and that (b) this publication is unlikely to appear in this specific journal. In short, it may be time to move on and think about alternative publication venues.
On this site, we have many ...