Theory of Relativity?

A mass moving with the velocity of light?

This is like asking what would happen if we discover that we've been wrong all this time to think that stuff we drop fall towards the ground, and that they actually just float at a constant distance from the ground.


OK, it makes sense to ask what would it would mean if special relativity makes bad predictions about massive objects that have been accelerated to speeds extremely close to c. It would mean that both special and general relativity would have to be replaced by more accurate theories (but we already know that they need to be replaced, because SR can't handle gravity and GR can't handle quantum effects).



If relativity didn't say what it says, it wouldn't be relativity, would it? Are you asking us to use another theory to answer the question? Which theory would you like us to use?

Evidences

eeinstein says mass and energy are equivalent.
Light is deflected by gravity. etc etc

You really need to read the FAQ. You are making a horrible misinterpretation. That's like saying a tomato has dirt, just because it grew out of the ground.

Zz.

I'm not asking for you to create a new theory all together. I'm just curious as to what would happen to pretty much everything we know about relitivistic physics? Assuming that E=mc^2 was wrong?

I'm not asking for you to create a new theory all together. I'm just curious as to what would happen to pretty much everything we know about relitivistic physics? Assuming that E=mc^2 was wrong?