T Nation

Does Size = Mass?


Is it possible to gain SIZE without gaining any weight, Or is size just a sign that you have put on more mass? Since size and strength are directly correlated, you could potentially increase your strength while dieting and increase your size right?


The last part of your paragraph is incomprehensible. You should take greater care in the way you phrase your intent.

If you are talking about muscle then you can't gain size without gaining mass. It's static.

However if you were referring to different substances like fat and muscle, then you could gain mass but lose size.

Anywho Newton was a smart guy, stop trying to hurt his feelings.


Agreed. It isn't that difficult. Yes, you can lose weight and possibly gain muscle and strength. It isn't likely, but it is possible assuming that you lost body fat in large amounts. The chances of that happening on a large scale in most people who aren't beginners is slim.


If you're a begginer,
you could lose fat while adding muscle (harder when you're not a newb) this might mean mass (body weight) reduced while certain areas gained size (e.g. back, legs, biceps) and other areas lost size (waist!)



I fixed the first post, amazing what one word can do, huh?

Anyhow, My question wasn't whether or not it was possible to lose fat and gain muscle and the same time. My question was whether or not you need to increase the amount of LBM on your body to increase the size of your muscles. I was curious since strength and size have a positive correlation, if one was to increase their strength on a maintenence diet they could theoretically increase their size without gaining any weight... But that could be totally wrong.


Yes, increased muscle size is an increase in lean body mass. Unless you gain bone while losing muscle or gain size in your internal organs while losing muscle, lean body mass is associated with a Muscle mass increase.

I am more interested in why you think this would not be the case.


You could inflate your muscles with a pneumatic hose.


I just think its fun to think theorectically some times... And luckily there are people on this board that know MUCH more than I do, so I ask questions to them. Thanks for the replies.


Are you wondering if different types of muscle fibres will weigh different amounts?
I would say sarcoplasmic hypertrophied fibres would be a slightly different weight to myofibrillar hypertrophy due to having different substances make them up in their total volume. Don't know which one would be heavier but i'd say causing water retention would increase muscle size and increase mass less than if it was actual muscle.


It still gets called "lean body mass".