Changes

In the subsection on mass increase, it is claimed that the abandonment of the relativistic mass point of view "undermines" the famous equation <math>E=mc^2</math>. I find this statement rather odd. After all, the broader principle underlying this equation is that if <math>p</math> is the 4-momentum vector of a particle, then the magnitude of <math>p</math> is the same in all inertial reference frames and equal (in units where c = 1) to the rest mass of the particle. This remains true regardless of whether one uses the language of relativistic mass or not. As currently written, this subsection is liable to confuse anyone who is unfamiliar with the subject.--[[User:Lemonpeel|Lemonpeel]] 20:41, 25 May 2009 (EDT)

In the subsection on mass increase, it is claimed that the abandonment of the relativistic mass point of view "undermines" the famous equation <math>E=mc^2</math>. I find this statement rather odd. After all, the broader principle underlying this equation is that if <math>p</math> is the 4-momentum vector of a particle, then the magnitude of <math>p</math> is the same in all inertial reference frames and equal (in units where c = 1) to the rest mass of the particle. This remains true regardless of whether one uses the language of relativistic mass or not. As currently written, this subsection is liable to confuse anyone who is unfamiliar with the subject.--[[User:Lemonpeel|Lemonpeel]] 20:41, 25 May 2009 (EDT)

== Great article ==

== Great article ==