But it's not really just "mass", it's "characteristic mass of stationary minimal possible wrinkle in a given field". And it doesn't sound like it has anything to do with force range, and "stiffness" does.
> it's not really just "mass", it's "characteristic mass of stationary minimal possible wrinkle in a given field"
If you are referring to the claim in the article that goes along with the equation E = m c^2, that claim is the author's personal interpretation, which I don't buy. The mass appears in the dispersion relation whether the particle is at rest or not. "Rest mass" is an outdated term for it; a better term is "invariant mass", i.e., it's the invariant associated with the particle's 4-momentum. Or, in field terms, it's the invariant associated with the dispersion relation of the field and the waves it generates.
