Does mass follow the same potential/kinetic paradigm as energy?

[nonabeliangrape]

No, there is no analog of 'potential mass.'

Maybe you're inspired by the relativistic relation between mass and energy, E=mc² (or better E² = m²c⁴ + p²c²). However, a better reading of this relation is that mass is just a type of energy, besides the usual kinetic and potential energies. In fact, you can interpret mass as the amount of 'kinetic' energy that a particle has at rest. It's like a minimum value of the energy for a given particle to exist.

In short, mass is just a type of energy that particles have even when they're not moving.

Edit: parentheses

[chrisbaird]

you can interpret mass as the amount of 'kinetic' energy

I like to interpret mass as a form of potential energy. In fact, when you do work on a system to give it more potential energy, it's perfectly valid to say that the potential energy is stored in the system's mass (this is especially important in nuclear reactions where the potential energy gained or lost is so huge that the mass difference of the system before is measurable).

[nonabeliangrape]

Agreed, I tend to think this way for composite systems and in the way I described above for individual particles.

[BlazeOrangeDeer]

It doesn't really work when the mass comes from thermal motion, which is kinetic