# Explanations for the cosmic speed limit often conflate mass with inertia.

#### Wendy

Joined Mar 24, 2008
23,190
Reading this article I am reminded of some of the things I was taught in electronics that are simplifications of the reality.how many times do we start by telling beginners that electricity flows similar in a way to water . Even though this is incorrect. But it gives the beginner a tool to start learning with .

#### crutschow

Joined Mar 14, 2008
32,067
Yes, I had thought that the mass of an object increases indefinitely as you approach the speed of light, but obviously that shouldn't t be true, since then the object's gravitation field would also increase indefinitely.
Possibly makes more sense that just the object's inertial increases, inertia now being not directly just a function of mass.

But that brings up an interesting question.
If the mass doesn't increase, then where does the energy go that's driving the mass incrementally closer and closer to light speed, since that energy is recovered when the object hits another object?
It seems to mean it's actually the object's inertia that stores the energy of a moving object, not the mass.
Does this also mean the Higg's Field really adds inertia to an object, not mass?
And that moving rapidly through the Higg's Field adds inertia to the object?

Last edited:

#### nsaspook

Joined Aug 27, 2009
11,290
Reading this article I am reminded of some of the things I was taught in electronics that are simplifications of the reality.how many times do we start by telling beginners that electricity flows similar in a way to water . Even though this is incorrect. But it gives the beginner a tool to start learning with .
And just like the article says it leads to misconceptions that seem logical but are fundamentally incorrect and incompatible with a deeper understanding, like current being electrical energy.