Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?

  • 175 Replies
  • 21438 Views
*

JJA

  • 6869
  • Math is math!
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #30 on: November 19, 2020, 03:17:25 PM »
If you are in a car going 80mph and you press on the accelerator, do you feel 80mph of acceleration?  Of course not, that's absurd.
Talking about "80mph of acceleration" is absurd.

Exactly my point.  He said objects should fall at the speed of the world... I put that example into something easier to understand to show why it was wrong.

Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #31 on: November 20, 2020, 06:35:39 AM »
Exactly my point.  He said objects should fall at the speed of the world... I put that example into something easier to understand to show why it was wrong.
Hey man, I'm generally on your side. I was just taking issue with your use of mph as a unit of acceleration.  It's a unit of velocity (which I'm sure you realize).

*

JJA

  • 6869
  • Math is math!
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #32 on: November 20, 2020, 04:48:17 PM »
Exactly my point.  He said objects should fall at the speed of the world... I put that example into something easier to understand to show why it was wrong.
Hey man, I'm generally on your side. I was just taking issue with your use of mph as a unit of acceleration.  It's a unit of velocity (which I'm sure you realize).

I was using it wrong on purpose to make it easier to see what the original poster was doing wrong.  I should have been more sarcastic in my tone when using it.  Which is really surprising for me.  :)

Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #33 on: November 21, 2020, 08:42:19 AM »
Feel free to dig around a little bit and see if you can come up with a real answer. I mean, you won't, because you can't, because there is no law that prevents something from being able to accelerate at a constant rate for an arbitrary amount of time. And that object will still never appear to exceed c to any observer.

How do we know this? because Einstein showed us. The same man who formulated the General Theory of Relativity, which describes how "gravity" works... the thing that keeps us fixed to the surface of the Earth.     
Odd. I'm pretty sure Einstein said Gravity doesn't exist.

I think what he meant by that was Gravity doesn't exist as a force, in the way that Newton described gravity.
Newton always thought that there was some kind of instantaneous force between two masses that pulled them together. Einstein realized this was wrong and that objects in freefall accelerating towards the Earth had no forces acting on them. It was this that led him to formulate his theory of general relativity (curved spacetime).

Just because in GR the proper acceleration at the Earth's surface is approx 9.81 m/s^2, doesn't mean its actually accelerating, for example in the UK the proper acceleration is 1g upwards and in Australia it has a proper acceleration of the same magnitude but in the opposite direction. So how can the Earth be accelerating in both directions?   

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #34 on: November 24, 2020, 09:50:50 AM »
The guy clearly doesn't know what he's talking about if he wishes to claim we are traveling x % of the speed of light without giving a FoR.
What is an appropriate FoR for the acceleration of the flat earth?  How long has the flat earth been accelerating relative to that FoR?  How fast is the flat earth moving relative to that FoR?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17563
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #35 on: November 24, 2020, 01:27:55 PM »
The guy clearly doesn't know what he's talking about if he wishes to claim we are traveling x % of the speed of light without giving a FoR.
What is an appropriate FoR for the acceleration of the flat earth? How long has the flat earth been accelerating relative to that FoR? How fast is the flat earth moving relative to that FoR?
What relevance does this have to my statement. All FoR are equally valid. Aside from that, I didn't mention acceleration at all.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #36 on: November 24, 2020, 04:10:28 PM »
The guy clearly doesn't know what he's talking about if he wishes to claim we are traveling x % of the speed of light without giving a FoR.
What is an appropriate FoR for the acceleration of the flat earth? How long has the flat earth been accelerating relative to that FoR? How fast is the flat earth moving relative to that FoR?
What relevance does this have to my statement. All FoR are equally valid. Aside from that, I didn't mention acceleration at all.
It's relevant to being able to properly reframe the OP's question so that becomes answerable.  If all FoR are valid, then why not just pick one where the flat earth is accelerating upwards at 9.8m/s^2 and calculate what percentage of the speed of light the flat earth would be traveling after some arbitrarily long period of time?

I find it interesting how FE'ers like to claim that the earth is accelerating upwards at a rate of 9.8m/s^2 without mentioning a FoR, yet chastise noobs for not providing a FoR when they ask how fast the FE should be moving.  It's almost as if they haven't thought about the consequences of their claims.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #37 on: November 24, 2020, 04:34:19 PM »
The guy clearly doesn't know what he's talking about if he wishes to claim we are traveling x % of the speed of light without giving a FoR.
What is an appropriate FoR for the acceleration of the flat earth?  How long has the flat earth been accelerating relative to that FoR?  How fast is the flat earth moving relative to that FoR?
In terms of it providing an apparent downwards force, that would be in the instantaneous inertial reference frame travelling with Earth at any point in time. Meaning a different frame for any point of time.
It is in these frames that Earth is accelerating at a constant rate of 9.8 m/s^2.
It is the proper acceleration in the reference frame of the accelerating Earth.

If you use any single inertial frame of reference then the rate of acceleration will not be constant and instead will approach 0 as the system approaches the speed of light.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #38 on: November 29, 2020, 01:04:48 PM »

I find it interesting how FE'ers like to claim that the earth is accelerating upwards at a rate of 9.8m/s^2 without mentioning a FoR, yet chastise noobs for not providing a FoR when they ask how fast the FE should be moving. 
From the frame rate of the earth, which is the only one which matters and is being observed... It's velocity in this frame is zero by definition.
You can pick whatever arbitrary frame you'd like, if you wish to do so. As John notes, any frame gives valid observation. In none of the frames will the earth be observed to be exceeding the speed of light.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #39 on: November 30, 2020, 07:23:48 AM »
I find it interesting how FE'ers like to claim that the earth is accelerating upwards at a rate of 9.8m/s^2 without mentioning a FoR, yet chastise noobs for not providing a FoR when they ask how fast the FE should be moving. 
From the frame rate of the earth, which is the only one which matters and is being observed... It's velocity in this frame is zero by definition.
If the flat earth is not accelerating in that frame of reference, then what causes the phenomenon that we commonly refer to as gravity?

You can pick whatever arbitrary frame you'd like, if you wish to do so.
Actually, I'd rather that you (or some authoritative source) pick an approprate frame of reference and stick with it so that when you say "the flat earth is accelerating upwards at a rate of 9.8m/s^2" the rest of us don't have to keep asking "relative to what?"
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #40 on: November 30, 2020, 12:49:11 PM »
If the flat earth is not accelerating in that frame of reference, then what causes the phenomenon that we commonly refer to as gravity?
It is an accelerating reference frame.
This means it has a pseudoforce acting on everything inside the frame.

To see the acceleration, you would to look at an inertial reference frame selected such that the instantaneous velocity of Earth is 0. This is only accurate at this instance, and as you get further from this instant it will become less and less accurate.
In this instant, in this frame, the UA model has Earth accelerating at a rate of 9.8 m/s^2


Actually, I'd rather that you (or some authoritative source) pick an approprate frame of reference and stick with it so that when you say "the flat earth is accelerating upwards at a rate of 9.8m/s^2" the rest of us don't have to keep asking "relative to what?"
The point is there isn't any reference frame which is appropriate which Earth is accelerating in.
The only reference frame which is appropriate is the one which is accelerating with Earth as that is the one we would live in if the model were true.
This frame has a proper acceleration of 9.8 m/s^2

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #41 on: November 30, 2020, 06:00:39 PM »

From the frame rate of the earth, which is the only one which matters and is being observed... It's velocity in this frame is zero by definition.
If the flat earth is not accelerating in that frame of reference, then what causes the phenomenon that we commonly refer to as gravity?
The fact you have been around this long and do not understand frames, but are still only too happy to try to argue about them is staggering.


Quote
You can pick whatever arbitrary frame you'd like, if you wish to do so.
Actually, I'd rather that you (or some authoritative source) pick an approprate frame of reference and stick with it so that when you say "the flat earth is accelerating upwards at a rate of 9.8m/s^2" the rest of us don't have to keep asking "relative to what?"
All frames are appropriate...  You can pick any desired hypothetical frame or work backwards to "observe" a given value for acceleration from a frame if you'd like to. I don't care, and it has no impact on this frame. In none of the frames has the earth accelerated past the speed of light.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2020, 06:05:48 PM by Ski »
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17563
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #42 on: December 01, 2020, 10:19:35 AM »
As Ski points out, there is no preferred frame of reference. The balls you must have to claim we haven't thought out the consequences of this argument after seeing us talk about it for over a decade.
« Last Edit: December 01, 2020, 10:21:38 AM by John Davis »

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #43 on: December 01, 2020, 02:32:52 PM »

From the frame rate of the earth, which is the only one which matters and is being observed... It's velocity in this frame is zero by definition.
If the flat earth is not accelerating in that frame of reference, then what causes the phenomenon that we commonly refer to as gravity?
The fact you have been around this long and do not understand frames, but are still only too happy to try to argue about them is staggering.
I'm not arguing FoRs.  I'm simply pointing out that FE'ers tend to be pretty vague about them when describing the UA, yet happily harp on noobs when they don't include one when asking how fast the FE should be traveling.  Seems pretty hypocritical to me.


Quote
You can pick whatever arbitrary frame you'd like, if you wish to do so.
Actually, I'd rather that you (or some authoritative source) pick an approprate frame of reference and stick with it so that when you say "the flat earth is accelerating upwards at a rate of 9.8m/s^2" the rest of us don't have to keep asking "relative to what?"
All frames are appropriate...  You can pick any desired hypothetical frame or work backwards to "observe" a given value for acceleration from a frame if you'd like to. I don't care, and it has no impact on this frame. In none of the frames has the earth accelerated past the speed of light.
Agreed.  However, it does have an impact on what relativistic effects should be observed as the FE approaches the speed of light.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

boydster

  • Assistant to the Regional Manager
  • Planar Moderator
  • 17754
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #44 on: December 01, 2020, 03:17:29 PM »
The only FoR that really matters for conversation is the instantaneous one at the surface of the Earth at the moment being discussed. That's what an observer on the surface of that Earth observes and experiences. For normal conversation, it would only make sense to be more specific when discussing a different FoR.

It's when people ask something ignorant like "Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet" or "how fast is the flat earth moving right now" that it becomes more important to point out that the person asking the question isn't understanding how GR works at a basic level.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #45 on: December 01, 2020, 03:30:22 PM »
All frames are appropriate...  You can pick any desired hypothetical frame or work backwards to "observe" a given value for acceleration from a frame if you'd like to. I don't care, and it has no impact on this frame. In none of the frames has the earth accelerated past the speed of light.
Agreed.  However, it does have an impact on what relativistic effects should be observed as the FE approaches the speed of light.
Since all observers are ostensibly observing in this accelerating frame, and we've established the frame's velocity is zero by definition, what relativistic effects to you anticipate observing? Exactly how close to the speed of light is zero?
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #46 on: December 02, 2020, 07:41:21 AM »
Since all observers are ostensibly observing in this accelerating frame, and we've established the frame's velocity is zero by definition, what relativistic effects to you anticipate observing?
Well, there's the nagging question of the energy source that is causing the upward acceleration.  As you already know, as velocity approaches the speed of light, mass also increases and therefore the energy required to continue the constant acceleration increases.  How fast do you suppose the FE is traveling relative to that energy source?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17563
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #47 on: December 02, 2020, 08:33:06 AM »
Since all observers are ostensibly observing in this accelerating frame, and we've established the frame's velocity is zero by definition, what relativistic effects to you anticipate observing?
Well, there's the nagging question of the energy source that is causing the upward acceleration.  As you already know, as velocity approaches the speed of light, mass also increases and therefore the energy required to continue the constant acceleration increases.  How fast do you suppose the FE is traveling relative to that energy source?
0 m/s.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #48 on: December 02, 2020, 10:26:33 AM »
.As you already know, as velocity approaches the speed of light, mass also increases
No, it doesn't.

Quote
... energy required to continue the constant acceleration increases.
Only from outside frames.


Quote from: John Davis
Quote from: markjo
How fast do you suppose the FE is traveling relative to that energy source?
0 m/s.

"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #49 on: December 02, 2020, 11:42:49 AM »
.As you already know, as velocity approaches the speed of light, mass also increases
No, it doesn't.
Einstein says it does.
https://www.britannica.com/science/relativistic-mass

Quote
... energy required to continue the constant acceleration increases.
Only from outside frames.
Yes, like the frame that includes the unknown energy source that causes UA.


Quote from: John Davis
Quote from: markjo
How fast do you suppose the FE is traveling relative to that energy source?
0 m/s.
Interesting.  Would you care to elaborate?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #50 on: December 02, 2020, 12:01:34 PM »
.As you already know, as velocity approaches the speed of light, mass also increases
No, it doesn't.
Einstein says it does.
https://www.britannica.com/science/relativistic-mass
No, he doesn't. Sounds like you don't understand the meaning of "relativistic mass". 

Don't feel bad, it's misleading and should be replaced.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #51 on: December 02, 2020, 12:08:59 PM »
.As you already know, as velocity approaches the speed of light, mass also increases
No, it doesn't.
Einstein says it does.
https://www.britannica.com/science/relativistic-mass
No, he doesn't. Sounds like you don't understand the meaning of "relativistic mass". 

Don't feel bad, it's misleading and should be replaced.
Apparently Britannica doesn't understand it either because they say:
"The relativistic mass m becomes infinite as the velocity of the body approaches the speed of light, so, even if large momentum and energy are arbitrarily supplied to a body, its velocity always remains less than c."

Then again, I've heard it said that if you think you understand relativity, then you don't understand relativity.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #52 on: December 02, 2020, 12:21:14 PM »
Since all observers are ostensibly observing in this accelerating frame, and we've established the frame's velocity is zero by definition, what relativistic effects to you anticipate observing?
Well, there's the nagging question of the energy source that is causing the upward acceleration.  As you already know, as velocity approaches the speed of light, mass also increases and therefore the energy required to continue the constant acceleration increases.  How fast do you suppose the FE is traveling relative to that energy source?
Remember, it is a constant proper acceleration.
The energy required will never increase.

To any hypothetical outside observer, as Earth approaches the speed of light its rate of acceleration will appear to decrease due to the effects of relativity.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #53 on: December 02, 2020, 02:55:15 PM »
Apparently Britannica doesn't understand it either because they say:
"The relativistic mass m becomes infinite as the velocity of the body approaches the speed of light, so, even if large momentum and energy are arbitrarily supplied to a body, its velocity always remains less than c."

Then again, I've heard it said that if you think you understand relativity, then you don't understand relativity.

There's nothing wrong with what Britannica wrote. ???    Relativistic mass ≠ mass
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #54 on: December 02, 2020, 06:04:02 PM »
Apparently Britannica doesn't understand it either because they say:
"The relativistic mass m becomes infinite as the velocity of the body approaches the speed of light, so, even if large momentum and energy are arbitrarily supplied to a body, its velocity always remains less than c."

Then again, I've heard it said that if you think you understand relativity, then you don't understand relativity.

There's nothing wrong with what Britannica wrote. ???    Relativistic mass ≠ mass
And yet you couldn't infer from the context that I was referring to relativistic mass?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #55 on: December 02, 2020, 10:59:23 PM »
Apparently Britannica doesn't understand it either because they say:
"The relativistic mass m becomes infinite as the velocity of the body approaches the speed of light, so, even if large momentum and energy are arbitrarily supplied to a body, its velocity always remains less than c."

Then again, I've heard it said that if you think you understand relativity, then you don't understand relativity.

There's nothing wrong with what Britannica wrote. ???    Relativistic mass ≠ mass
And yet you couldn't infer from the context that I was referring to relativistic mass?
Perhaps because you used the word "mass" which is invariant, and not "relativistic mass" which is not a measurement of mass at all, but of total energy of which mass is a part.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #56 on: December 03, 2020, 12:13:14 AM »
Perhaps because you used the word "mass" which is invariant, and not "relativistic mass" which is not a measurement of mass at all, but of total energy of which mass is a part.
You mean rest mass right?
There is relativistic mass and rest mass.
"mass" can refer to either, with the meaning varying depending on context.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #57 on: December 03, 2020, 06:52:37 AM »
Perhaps because you used the word "mass" which is invariant, and not "relativistic mass" which is not a measurement of mass at all, but of total energy of which mass is a part.
You mean rest mass right?
There is relativistic mass and rest mass.
"mass" can refer to either, with the meaning varying depending on context.
There is only one kind of mass and it is invariant.  "Relativistic mass" is a measurement of energy, not mass.

Energy has inertia and exhibits gravitation and interacts with gravitational fields. It contributes to the SEM-tensor.

A photon never has mass, but it has inertia, momentum, and exhibits gravitation. It contributes to the SEM-tensor.

A closed pot with water has a given invariant mass of metal, water, and air. If we heat the water to a  boil it increases the energy of the boiler, but not the mass. The boiling pot of water (were we able to accurately and precisely measure it) will have greater inertia, momentum, and exhibit stronger gravitation than the same pot at room temperature.  The same pot on a moving train will have greater still, because it has added kinetic energy.

At no point, in any frame, does the mass of the pot change.

Since we classically think of inertia, momentum, and gravitation as properties of mass and not energy, this measure of total energy (including mass [mass-energy equivalence]) was termed "relativistic mass".  It becomes frame dependent (relative velocities adding energy, and thus inertia, momentum, gravitation), so it is "relative".  But it is not a measure of mass.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #58 on: December 03, 2020, 11:50:55 AM »
There is only one kind of mass and it is invariant.  "Relativistic mass" is a measurement of energy, not mass.
No, there are 2 kinds.
There is rest mass, which is invariant, and there is relativistic mass, which is not.

If there was only one type of mass, there would be no need for the term rest mass.
If relativistic mass was merely a measure of energy, then it would have been called relativistic energy (which is a term which already exists), not mass.

You are now trying to appeal to the connection between mass and energy to relativistic mass is not mass.

Since we classically think of inertia, momentum, and gravitation as properties of mass and not energy, this measure of total energy (including mass [mass-energy equivalence]) was termed "relativistic mass".
Alternatively, since those properties were defined in terms of mass, we recognised that there was a relativistic mass, which is still a measure of mass as it relates directly to those properties. Unlike rest mass, relativistic mass is frame dependent, but it is still a measure of mass.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Has the flat earth reached the speed of light yet?
« Reply #59 on: December 03, 2020, 11:55:00 AM »
It's not a measurement of mass. By definition. Semantically saying, "well, it's called 'relativistic mass'" does not make it a measure of mass.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."