Talk:Contagium vivum fluidum
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
edit
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Scarycheerio123.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Isn't particle-liquid even a false dichotomy at this level in a way?
editLiquids themselves are formed by particles, so there's this overlap. I assume viruses were proposed as "liquid" not in the most literal sense, like having a bucket full of pure viruses, but in the sense it can slip through just like the aerosolized water droplets that can carry viruses themselves and slip through tight meshes, and, in this state, are not even that much significantly "liquid," it's almost gaseous/particulate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.234.133.182 (talk) 03:28, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, I've expanded the article. Ivanovsky pointed out this false dichotomy. Both Ivanovsky and Beijerinck were understandably confused. The disease turned out to be a particle but not a cell. Wendell Meredith Stanley found that it was almost like a living chemical: it could be crystallized and stored indefinitely, then dissolved and it would "come back to life" and regain its infectious properties. The understanding of what a virus is came about gradually. cagliost (talk) 18:10, 6 February 2023 (UTC)