Atomic Models (from Dalton to Bohr)
If you kept splitting a piece of iron over and over, would you reach a piece so small that it couldn't be split any further? That question is more than two thousand years old. The answer we give today didn't occur to anyone all at once: it was built up little by little, with four models of the atom, each one better than the one before, and each change came about thanks to an experiment.
Dalton: the atom as a solid ball
When $1.0\text{ g}$ of hydrogen reacts with $8.0\text{ g}$ of oxygen, you always get exactly $9.0\text{ g}$ of water, and if you add more oxygen it doesn't react: it's simply left over. Why do elements always combine in fixed mass proportions?
In 1805, John Dalton proposed that all matter is made of atoms: tiny, solid, indivisible little balls. Think of a billiard ball.
With this very simple idea, Dalton explained why different elements exist and why they always combine in the same proportions to form compounds.
In Physics class, the teacher shows a billiard ball and says that this is how Dalton imagined atoms around the year $1805$, as shown in the figure. Explain in your own…
In Physics class, the teacher shows a billiard ball and says that this is how Dalton imagined atoms around the year $1805$, as shown in the figure.
Explain in your own words what an atom is according to Dalton's model and what two properties that "ball" had.
In an assignment, Pablo writes: "Dalton's model was wrong, so it was completely useless." You disagree. Explain two things that Dalton's model did explain well (why…
In an assignment, Pablo writes: "Dalton's model was wrong, so it was completely useless." You disagree. Explain two things that Dalton's model did explain well (why different elements exist and how their atoms combine) and one thing it could not explain, which forced it to be changed.
Thomson: the plum pudding
When you rub a plastic pen on your sweater and it attracts little pieces of paper, matter is showing electrical properties. If atoms were solid, neutral spheres as Dalton said, where would that charge come from?
In 1897, J. J. Thomson was experimenting with cathode ray tubes and discovered a tiny, negatively charged particle coming out from inside the atom: the electron. The "indivisible" atom had smaller pieces inside it.
Since the whole atom is neutral, Thomson imagined the electrons (negative charge) embedded in a mass of positive charge, like raisins in a pudding. The positive charge of the mass exactly balances the negative charge of the electrons.
Diego's grandmother makes a plum pudding, like the one in the figure. Thomson imagined the atom as this dessert: explain what the pudding mass represents in his model…
Diego's grandmother makes a plum pudding, like the one in the figure.
Thomson imagined the atom as this dessert: explain what the pudding mass represents in his model and what the raisins represent.
In a science museum, Leo observes a cathode ray tube like the one Thomson used in his experiments, similar to the one in the figure. Which particle did Thomson discover…
In a science museum, Leo observes a cathode ray tube like the one Thomson used in his experiments, similar to the one in the figure.
Which particle did Thomson discover using this apparatus and what electrical charge does it have?
Old cathode ray tube televisions worked using cathode rays, the same ones Thomson used to discover the electron in $1897$. The electron is a particle that comes from…
Old cathode ray tube televisions worked using cathode rays, the same ones Thomson used to discover the electron in $1897$. The electron is a particle that comes from inside the atom: explain why this discovery forced a change to Dalton's model.
To explain the models, a group of students uses a watermelon with seeds as an image of Thomson's model. a) Explain what each part of the watermelon represents in that…
To explain the models, a group of students uses a watermelon with seeds as an image of Thomson's model.
- a) Explain what each part of the watermelon represents in that model.
- b) Propose an everyday object or situation of your own that represents Rutherford's model and explain what each element is.
- c) No comparison is perfect: point out a flaw in using a watermelon as a model of the atom.
Rutherford: the atom is mostly empty space
In 1911, Ernest Rutherford fired $\alpha$ particles (with positive charge) at a very thin gold foil, to "feel" the inside of Thomson's atom.
If the atom were a plum pudding, with the positive charge spread throughout its volume, no particle should bounce back. The fact that some did can only be explained if all the positive charge is concentrated in a tiny, very massive point.
The atom is still neutral
It was known even before Rutherford that atoms are electrically neutral, and his model keeps that: the positive charge of the nucleus equals the negative charge of all the electrons around it. If the nucleus has 6 positive charges, there are 6 electrons around it, and the total is zero.
A new model can't throw away what the previous one already explained well. Thomson explained neutrality and the existence of electrons; Rutherford keeps both and adds what Thomson couldn't explain: the bouncing of the $\alpha$ particles.
What holds the electrons together?
In the solar system, the force that keeps the planets orbiting the Sun is gravity. In the atom, the gravity between an electron and the nucleus is negligible, because the masses are tiny. What keeps the electron close to the nucleus is electric attraction: the nucleus has positive charge, the electron has negative charge, and opposite charges attract.
Similarity: in both cases a small body orbits a central one, attracted to it. Difference: for planets the force is gravitational (always attractive, depends on mass); in the atom it is electric (depends on charge and can be attractive or repulsive).
Aitana watches Rutherford's gold foil experiment in a documentary: positively charged $\alpha$ particles were fired at an extremely thin sheet of gold foil, as shown in…
Aitana watches Rutherford's gold foil experiment in a documentary: positively charged $\alpha$ particles were fired at an extremely thin sheet of gold foil, as shown in the figure.
What happened to the vast majority of the particles when they reached the foil? What conclusion did Rutherford draw about the inside of the atom?
In the gold foil experiment, three things were observed: most $\alpha$ particles passed through the foil without being deflected, a few were deflected, and very rarely,…
In the gold foil experiment, three things were observed: most $\alpha$ particles passed through the foil without being deflected, a few were deflected, and very rarely, one bounced back, as shown in the figure.
Write down the conclusion Rutherford drew from each of the three observations.
In a class debate, Nora argues that the gold foil experiment disproved Thomson's model. If the atom were truly a sphere of positive charge with embedded electrons, what…
In a class debate, Nora argues that the gold foil experiment disproved Thomson's model. If the atom were truly a sphere of positive charge with embedded electrons, what should have happened to the $\alpha$ particles upon reaching the foil? Which observation from the experiment does not fit this prediction? Justify your answer.
Rutherford's model is called the "planetary model" because it resembles the Solar System, as shown in the figure. State one similarity and one difference between the…
Rutherford's model is called the "planetary model" because it resembles the Solar System, as shown in the figure.
State one similarity and one difference between the planets orbiting the Sun and the electrons orbiting the nucleus (think about which force holds each system together).
When Rutherford proposed his model, he could not ignore what was already known: for example, that atoms are electrically neutral. Explain how atomic neutrality fits into…
When Rutherford proposed his model, he could not ignore what was already known: for example, that atoms are electrically neutral. Explain how atomic neutrality fits into Rutherford's model (positive nucleus and electrons) and why a new model must also explain the facts that the previous model already explained well.
Imagine that in the gold foil experiment, most of the $\alpha$ particles had bounced back instead of passing through the foil. What would Rutherford have concluded about…
Imagine that in the gold foil experiment, most of the $\alpha$ particles had bounced back instead of passing through the foil. What would Rutherford have concluded about the inside of the atom in that case? Which known model would that conclusion most closely resemble? Explain your reasoning.
In the gold foil experiment, for every $8000$ $\alpha$ particles fired, about $7992$ passed through the foil without being deflected, about $7$ were deflected, and only…
In the gold foil experiment, for every $8000$ $\alpha$ particles fired, about $7992$ passed through the foil without being deflected, about $7$ were deflected, and only $1$ bounced back.
- a) Calculate what percentage of the particles passed through the foil cleanly.
- b) What fraction of the fired particles bounced back?
- c) Using these numbers, explain why Rutherford stated that the atom is mostly empty space and that the nucleus is tiny.
$\alpha$ particles have a positive charge, just like the nucleus of the atom, as shown in the figure. a) Using the forces between electrical charges, explain why a…
$\alpha$ particles have a positive charge, just like the nucleus of the atom, as shown in the figure.
- a) Using the forces between electrical charges, explain why a $\alpha$ particle passing near the nucleus is deflected from its path.
- b) Why are the particles that bounce back precisely those that get closest to the nucleus?
- c) If the foil were bombarded with uncharged particles, would you expect to see the same deflections? Justify your answer.
Some scientists repeat the experiment with a foil made of a metal other than gold and observe that twice as many $\alpha$ particles now bounce back, although they are…
Some scientists repeat the experiment with a foil made of a metal other than gold and observe that twice as many $\alpha$ particles now bounce back, although they are still very few.
- a) Is the idea that the atom is mostly empty space still valid? Why?
- b) Propose a hypothesis explaining why more particles bounce back with this metal (think about what its nucleus might be like compared to gold).
- c) What new experiment would you carry out to test your hypothesis? Explain your reasoning.
Bohr: electrons in allowed orbits
Rutherford's model had a serious problem: according to the laws of physics known at the time, an orbiting electron should keep losing energy and end up falling into the nucleus. If that happened, no atom would be stable, and atoms are stable.
In 1913, Niels Bohr proposed a new rule: electrons cannot orbit at just any distance from the nucleus; they only occupy certain allowed orbits, like the steps of a staircase (or the cars of a Ferris wheel: you can't ride in midair between two). As long as an electron is in one of those orbits, it doesn't lose energy and doesn't fall.
Move the sliders in the interactive and notice how the shells fill up one by one as you add electrons.
On a Ferris wheel at a fairground, you can only travel sitting in a carriage, never hanging in the air between two carriages. Bohr proposed something similar for…
On a Ferris wheel at a fairground, you can only travel sitting in a carriage, never hanging in the air between two carriages. Bohr proposed something similar for electrons, as shown in the figure.
Explain what Bohr said about electron orbits and how his model differed from Rutherford's.
To explain Bohr's model, a teacher compares a staircase to a slide, as in the figure: on the staircase, you can only stand on a step, but on the slide, you can stop at…
To explain Bohr's model, a teacher compares a staircase to a slide, as in the figure: on the staircase, you can only stand on a step, but on the slide, you can stop at any height.
Match each image with one of the two models, Rutherford's and Bohr's, and explain what each step of the staircase represents.
Rutherford's model had a problem: according to the physics of the time, an electron orbiting the nucleus should gradually lose energy and end up falling into it, as…
Rutherford's model had a problem: according to the physics of the time, an electron orbiting the nucleus should gradually lose energy and end up falling into it, as shown in the figure, meaning atoms would not be stable.
- a) Explain what Bohr proposed to prevent this electron collapse.
- b) Why do we say that Bohr added a "new rule" instead of simply drawing Rutherford's orbits better?
Why models change
The four models are not isolated ideas: each one comes from an experiment that the previous model couldn't explain.
| Scientist | Year | Idea of the atom | What supported it or made it change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dalton | 1805 | Solid, indivisible ball | Fixed proportions in reactions |
| Thomson | 1897 | Plum pudding | Cathode rays: the electron |
| Rutherford | 1911 | Small nucleus with electrons around it | Gold foil: bounces |
| Bohr | 1913 | Electrons in allowed orbits | Stability of the atom |
Some collectible cards of "atomic scientists" show these dates: Thomson, $1897$; Bohr, $1913$; Dalton, $1805$; Rutherford, $1911$. Order the four atomic models from…
Some collectible cards of "atomic scientists" show these dates: Thomson, $1897$; Bohr, $1913$; Dalton, $1805$; Rutherford, $1911$. Order the four atomic models from oldest to most recent.
Mario's favorite game is updated frequently to fix bugs and add improvements. Something similar happens with scientific models: explain why scientists replace one model…
Mario's favorite game is updated frequently to fix bugs and add improvements. Something similar happens with scientific models: explain why scientists replace one model with a new one.
In the exhibition "The Detectives of the Atom" there are four misplaced panels. Match each description with its scientist: Dalton, Thomson, Rutherford, or Bohr. a) "The…
In the exhibition "The Detectives of the Atom" there are four misplaced panels. Match each description with its scientist: Dalton, Thomson, Rutherford, or Bohr.
- a) "The atom is a solid, indivisible sphere."
- b) "Electrons are embedded in a positively charged sphere, like raisins in a pudding."
- c) "Almost the entire atom is empty space and positive charge is concentrated in a very small nucleus."
- d) "Electrons can only occupy certain permitted orbits."
These four descriptions of atomic models are out of order: a) "Electrons orbit a central nucleus, like planets around the Sun." b) "The atom is a solid, indivisible…
These four descriptions of atomic models are out of order:
- a) "Electrons orbit a central nucleus, like planets around the Sun."
- b) "The atom is a solid, indivisible ball."
- c) "Electrons can only be in certain permitted orbits."
- d) "The atom is a positive sphere with embedded electrons."
Order them chronologically, from the oldest model to the most recent, and write the name of the scientist who proposed each one.
Write a short encyclopaedia entry titled "The history of the atom in four models". For each scientist (Dalton, Thomson, Rutherford, and Bohr), state what their model…
Write a short encyclopaedia entry titled "The history of the atom in four models". For each scientist (Dalton, Thomson, Rutherford, and Bohr), state what their model contributed and what observation or experiment supported it.
Your eight-year-old cousin asks you why the diagrams of the atom in science books change. Write a simple explanation for them (you can compare it to updating a map when…
Your eight-year-old cousin asks you why the diagrams of the atom in science books change. Write a simple explanation for them (you can compare it to updating a map when a new path is discovered), explaining how science moved from Dalton's model to Bohr's model and what role experiments played in these changes.
Back to the beginning: yes, you would reach a limit: the iron atom is the smallest portion that is still iron. If you try to split it further, it stops being iron and you get subatomic particles (protons, neutrons, and electrons).