Hey all, I'm quite confused on this and am curious to be put straight. Now I understand the basic principles of relativity, this one just bugs me.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Now I have always been taught that the famous E=MC^2 formula was proof that mass would reach toward infinity as it neared the speed of light. Stephen Hawking even says "Because of the equivalence of energy and mass, the energy which an object has due to its motion will add to its mass." in his book A Brief History of Time.

Now I was informed by some other members that this isn't really the case, and that the whole notion of a massive object approaching the speed of light would not collapse into a black hole, etc. etc. and I believe them to be correct in their assessment.

So what is going on here, and why am I reading two very different views on a similar subject, or are they both correct and it's just the Mr and Mo terminology that is off and screwing everything up

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Relativistic Mass vs. Invariant Mass.

Loading...

Similar Threads - Relativistic Mass Invariant | Date |
---|---|

B Special Relativity & Relativistic Mass | Nov 23, 2017 |

B All mass is relativistic? | Oct 6, 2017 |

B Newb question about relativistic mass | Sep 26, 2017 |

B False predictions of relativistic mass | Sep 4, 2017 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**