Hi Robert,
You're a good guy and your bluntness helps me to see what's really happening. I just finished responding to someone's argument against my point of view.
If you can find what they wrote,
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=28724&st=135&#entry476630
Where they said,
"F ~ (G M h f)/(c²R² − 2 G M R) ≈ (G M / R² )(h f /c²) = g (h f / c²)
which Pound and Rebka described the frequency change mechanism giving this value as the "appearant weight of the photon" in 1960."
My rebuttal is at,
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=28869&st=0&#entry477913
Which is all to complicating to find. In a nutshell, Repenner is arguing that a bunch of physicists decided that,
[math]m=\frac{hf}{c^2}[/math]
means that the mass is different for different observers, and that's too hard. So they wrote,
[math]m = \sqrt{\frac{E^2}{c^4}-{\frac{p^2}{c^2}}} [/math]
and figured they would all be dead before anyone noticed or had the audacity to question it.
When you're solving for mass, your solving for all the mass. You're not hiding some mass in the momentum term so its nice and constant for all observers.
No wonder Relativity doesn't make sense. :-D
