Even using the system clock with millisecond-level accuracy, you can still get accuracy down to within .343 meters, which is 1.13 feet. Assuming the speed of sound in dry air at 20C and 1 atmosphere pressure (thanks Wolfram!) is ~343.2 m/s, that's not bad at all.

I was curious about your reference to a Count Dooku fighting Yoda, so I watched all three Star Wars movies and never once did Yoda even pick up a weapon. So, sorry, I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Ah, ignorance is bliss. :-)

They enticed you away with a raise, and you stayed because you kept getting fair market value for your service. That was kinda my whole point.

So, let me get this straight. Talking with your boss about another opportunity could be considered disloyal, but you actually left your current job for a better offer and then came back and you're advising others on what you consider to be company loyalty?

I would hardly consider these 4 links "accepted wisdom". The first link (Forbes) talks about some guy whose counteroffer was to be the CEO of a major multinational retailer. So what if he only had the job for 3 years? When your salary is $1m per year and you have a golden parachute bailout, 3 years as CEO is plenty of time to rack up some serious cash. It even mentioned that he took an early retirement. Oh, the horror. That sounds like just about the best possible outcome. CEO anecdotes are not really applicable for people working at the "peon" level.

Second link (frugaldad) is written by Jason (Frugal Dad) on his blog. His anecdote is that he was ready to receive a counteroffer, but he got laid off instead. He then goes on to contradict the belief that counteroffers are indicators of disloyalty in his second paragraph.

Third link (businessweek) is behind a paywall, or broken.

Fourth article (it.toolbox) was written by a recruiter who is obviously irritated by people who run through the whole recruitment process (thus wasting his time) and then stay with their current company due to a counter-offer. He ends the article with this:

And I think that speaks volumes. It's not accepted wisdom, it's one recruiter guy giving his opinion.

Whatever though. Of course, there are intangibles like the people you work with, that atmosphere, perks, and your general happiness. But OP didn't provide any background on most of that. Only that the commute was shorter and the pay is $7k more. My advice was to test the air - if his current employer is hostile to the idea, he can take that opportunity to give his notice and move on.

Seriously? Is anyone at your current company under the illusion that you would not leave for a high enough offer? People can pretend all they want, but the reality is that your current employer bought you from your previous employer. Every new person they hire, they are hiring away from another company, likely at a higher rate. What's the big surprise here? Of course your skills are for sale - that's why you're working. If they are not willing to pay market value for your skills then move on.

I suppose I'm rather baffled by the whole logic here; what, then, should he do? Refuse the current job offer and stay where he's at, but keep it a secret? How does that prove loyalty at all? Nobody knows about it. Or he could refuse the current job offer and then tell his current employer he was offered a job somewhere else but refused. That just sounds needy and pathetic - does that prove loyalty? Or does that prove you're too chickenshit to stand up and ask for a reasonable raise? Or he could man up and explain the situation to his boss. If his boss has a clue and his workplace isn't a hellhole, they might offer him a small raise. If they are hostile to the whole idea, then he's better off quitting and moving on anyway. I've never had a problem discussing stuff like this with my boss, she is intelligent and reasonable and understands that I have bills to pay and a family to feed. I don't work for the love of working, I work because I need a paycheck. If I can get a bigger paycheck by negotiating a little bit, what's the harm in that? If you work at a company that considers something like this untrustworthy, then maybe you should reevaluate the situation.

Bottom line is anyone can be bought, period. The only question is the price.

"Evaporation" of the planet might depend on surface area as well. The surface area of a sphere can be represented by A = 4*pi*r^2, so as r->0, A->0 as well. The smaller the planet gets, the smaller the surface area, obviously.

A second consideration would be the amount of matter ejected per second in relation to total mass of the planet, and whether this stays constant. TFA does not list the diameter of the planet in question.

Something along the lines of m = (matter ejected per second), A = 4*pi*r^2, so m/A = ejection rate. Graph ejection rate as a function of varying r. If we knew the diameter of the planet, we could establish a baseline for ejection rate. Another measurement of diameter and ejection rate would give us a rough number.

I'm gonna say that's a no. No, it doesn't.

This sounds like a wonderful idea, but something isn't quite right. I just can't quite get my thumb on it.

That's it, freedom! There are still some lingering freedoms out there, they must be found and eliminated.