Not really. To the extent that “relativistic mass” is a useful concept at all, you can just call it “energy”. Whenever anyone in relativity ever refers to “mass”, they always mean “rest mass”.
“Relativistic mass” is just mass scaled by Gamma (γ) or specifically:
mass[sub]relativistic[/sub] = mass[sub]0[/sub] * γ
As Chronos pointed out, in modern physics no one combines the terms because it causes too much confusion and has no value. The only time you really need to worry about it is if you are taking a course with an older textbook, reading older lectures like the Feynman papers, or the early debates where they came to the conclusion this concept was flawed.
Einstein never approved of Relativistic Mass, and the only thing it has ever offered is non-rational confusing meaning that prevents many people from grasping the concepts of relativity.
If you were the unfortunate recipient of this flawed concept in the past the best thing you can do is to just drop that anachronistic crutch.
Ratr Avatar-
I was just crafting a nice, careful exposition winging off your statement “Most of your post was spot on but it still has the problem of using pre-civil war scientific assumptions.” and offering a mea culpa that my educator instincts meant I had attempted to answer the query of the OP based on my non-judgemental assessment of the OP’s level of understanding and sophistication on this issue, and threw in Fisson and fusion, and, heck, could’a talked about cosmic rays and acceleration effects and ++++++, BUT I didn’t think that direction led to maximum enlightenment- at least, not for the OP- who I thought was looking for a gut level understanding that an analogy might be able to convey to allow a sense of the difference betwix mass and weight. I knew there would be some readers who would quibble with the idea that mass is invariable and ultimately static, etc.
And I came to a conclusion that the question could either be answered simply, with 67 & 2/3rds x 10 to the 7th unstated assumptions, inferred limitations, gaping ideological oversteps, and inherently incorrect concepts, OR it could be addressed fairly soildily, but become an inescapingly philosophical discussion without the possibility of a definitive resolution. I had alluded to the fission, fusion, and could have thrown in cosmic rays, acceleration effects, and God knows what else, as a nod to those who might wish to ponder this at a much. deeper. level. So much so that the old quip about “only three people could understand Einstein’s paper when he published it” (peer review must’ve been a bitch) came to mind. ANd I went on with that, for 2 or 3 or 11 paragraphs…when, suddenly, for some unknown and unknowable reason, my browser hiccupped and zoomed straight to some chaos-based version of chrome, and all that brilliance, insightful wit and epiphany-inducing lucidity was lost to the ether forever. It was one hell of a great post - a magnificent post. People would have memorized that post- they would’ve had it tattooed on their body, carved into their headstones, used as the full legal name of their next-born child, resolved climate change and led to the formation of a third (and successful) party in American politics. It was so good I tried to at least get a flavor of it- I typed as much as I could again- when, without warning, and malice aforethought, this heartless machine did the same bloody thing to me again.
I can only say----enough. It is gone. Gone, lost to us like Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s “Kubla Khan; or, A Vision in a Dream: A Fragment”.
As a pharmacy prof, I’ll leave it to your imagination if the fault lies with an opium-induced fever dream- just know you will never know the magnificence that was Xanadu…
I just don’t have the time- or the light- or the energy- or the gravitas…
M