The Structure of the Atom Quiz

PDF page 736: In the early 1900’s, the plum pudding model was the accepted model of the atom. Proposed in 1904 by J. J. Thomson, the model suggested that the atom was a spherical ball of positive charge, with negatively charged electrons scattered evenly throughout. In that model, the positive charges made up the pudding, while the electrons acted as isolated plums. During its short life, the model could be used to explain why most particles were neutral, although with an unbalanced number of plums, electrically charged atoms could exist. When Ernest Rutherford began his gold foil experiment in 1909, it is unlikely that anyone would have expected that the plum pudding model would be challenged. However, using a radioactive source, a thin sheet of gold foil, and a phosphorescent screen, Rutherford would uncover something so great that he would later call it “the most incredible event that has ever happened to me in my life”[James, L. K. (1993). Nobel Laureates in Chemistry, 1901–1992. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.] The experiment that Rutherford designed is shown in Figure 22.2. As you can see in, a radioactive source was placed in a lead container with a hole in one side to produce a beam of positively charged helium particles, called alpha particles. Then, a thin gold foil sheet was placed in the beam. When the high-energy alpha particles passed through the gold foil, they were scattered. The scattering was observed from the bright spots they produced when they struck the phosphor screen.

PDF page 736: In the early 1900’s, the plum pudding model was the accepted model of the atom. Proposed in 1904 by J. J. Thomson, the model suggested that the atom was a spherical ball of positive charge, with negatively charged electrons scattered evenly throughout. In that model, the positive charges made up the pudding, while the electrons acted as isolated plums. During its short life, the model could be used to explain why most particles were neutral, although with an unbalanced number of plums, electrically charged atoms could exist. When Ernest Rutherford began his gold foil experiment in 1909, it is unlikely that anyone would have expected that the plum pudding model would be challenged. However, using a radioactive source, a thin sheet of gold foil, and a phosphorescent screen, Rutherford would uncover something so great that he would later call it “the most incredible event that has ever happened to me in my life”[James, L. K. (1993). Nobel Laureates in Chemistry, 1901–1992. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.] The experiment that Rutherford designed is shown in Figure 22.2. As you can see in, a radioactive source was placed in a lead container with a hole in one side to produce a beam of positively charged helium particles, called alpha particles. Then, a thin gold foil sheet was placed in the beam. When the high-energy alpha particles passed through the gold foil, they were scattered. The scattering was observed from the bright spots they produced when they struck the phosphor screen.

PDF page 736: In the early 1900’s, the plum pudding model was the accepted model of the atom. Proposed in 1904 by J. J. Thomson, the model suggested that the atom was a spherical ball of positive charge, with negatively charged electrons scattered evenly throughout. In that model, the positive charges made up the pudding, while the electrons acted as isolated plums. During its short life, the model could be used to explain why most particles were neutral, although with an unbalanced number of plums, electrically charged atoms could exist. When Ernest Rutherford began his gold foil experiment in 1909, it is unlikely that anyone would have expected that the plum pudding model would be challenged. However, using a radioactive source, a thin sheet of gold foil, and a phosphorescent screen, Rutherford would uncover something so great that he would later call it “the most incredible event that has ever happened to me in my life”[James, L. K. (1993). Nobel Laureates in Chemistry, 1901–1992. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.] The experiment that Rutherford designed is shown in Figure 22.2. As you can see in, a radioactive source was placed in a lead container with a hole in one side to produce a beam of positively charged helium particles, called alpha particles. Then, a thin gold foil sheet was placed in the beam. When the high-energy alpha particles passed through the gold foil, they were scattered. The scattering was observed from the bright spots they produced when they struck the phosphor screen.

PDF page 736: In the early 1900’s, the plum pudding model was the accepted model of the atom. Proposed in 1904 by J. J. Thomson, the model suggested that the atom was a spherical ball of positive charge, with negatively charged electrons scattered evenly throughout. In that model, the positive charges made up the pudding, while the electrons acted as isolated plums. During its short life, the model could be used to explain why most particles were neutral, although with an unbalanced number of plums, electrically charged atoms could exist. When Ernest Rutherford began his gold foil experiment in 1909, it is unlikely that anyone would have expected that the plum pudding model would be challenged. However, using a radioactive source, a thin sheet of gold foil, and a phosphorescent screen, Rutherford would uncover something so great that he would later call it “the most incredible event that has ever happened to me in my life”[James, L. K. (1993). Nobel Laureates in Chemistry, 1901–1992. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.] The experiment that Rutherford designed is shown in Figure 22.2. As you can see in, a radioactive source was placed in a lead container with a hole in one side to produce a beam of positively charged helium particles, called alpha particles. Then, a thin gold foil sheet was placed in the beam. When the high-energy alpha particles passed through the gold foil, they were scattered. The scattering was observed from the bright spots they produced when they struck the phosphor screen.

PDF page 737: few dozen rows of bowling pins. Any deflection was expected to be minor, and due primarily to the electrostatic Coulomb force between the alpha particles and the foil’s interior electric charges. However, the true result was nothing of the sort. While the majority of alpha particles passed through the foil unobstructed, Rutherford and his collaborators Hans Geiger and Ernest Marsden found that alpha particles occasionally were scattered to large angles, and some even came back in the direction from which they came! The result, called Rutherford scattering, implied that the gold nuclei were actually very small when compared with the size of the gold atom. As shown in Figure 22.3, the dense nucleus is surrounded by mostly empty space of the atom, an idea verified by the fact that only 1 in 8,000 particles was scattered backward.

PDF page 737: few dozen rows of bowling pins. Any deflection was expected to be minor, and due primarily to the electrostatic Coulomb force between the alpha particles and the foil’s interior electric charges. However, the true result was nothing of the sort. While the majority of alpha particles passed through the foil unobstructed, Rutherford and his collaborators Hans Geiger and Ernest Marsden found that alpha particles occasionally were scattered to large angles, and some even came back in the direction from which they came! The result, called Rutherford scattering, implied that the gold nuclei were actually very small when compared with the size of the gold atom. As shown in Figure 22.3, the dense nucleus is surrounded by mostly empty space of the atom, an idea verified by the fact that only 1 in 8,000 particles was scattered backward.

PDF page 737: cm , much greater than any macroscopic matter. Based on the size and mass of the nucleus revealed by his experiment, as well as the mass of electrons, Rutherford proposed the planetary model of the atom. The planetary model of the atom pictures low-mass electrons orbiting a large-mass nucleus. The sizes of the electron orbits are large compared with the size of the nucleus, and most of the atom is a vacuum. The model is analogous to how low-mass planets in our solar system orbit the large-mass Sun. In the atom, the attractive Coulomb force is analogous to gravitation in the planetary system (see Figure 22.4).

PDF page 737: The model was the first to recognize the structure of atoms, in which low-mass electrons orbit a very small, massive nucleus in orbits much larger than the nucleus. The atom is mostly empty and is analogous to our planetary system.

PDF page 737: cm , much greater than any macroscopic matter. Based on the size and mass of the nucleus revealed by his experiment, as well as the mass of electrons, Rutherford proposed the planetary model of the atom. The planetary model of the atom pictures low-mass electrons orbiting a large-mass nucleus. The sizes of the electron orbits are large compared with the size of the nucleus, and most of the atom is a vacuum. The model is analogous to how low-mass planets in our solar system orbit the large-mass Sun. In the atom, the attractive Coulomb force is analogous to gravitation in the planetary system (see Figure 22.4).

PDF page 737: Although the results of the experiment were published by his colleagues in 1909, it took Rutherford two years to convince himself of their meaning. Rutherford later wrote: “It was almost as incredible as if you fired a 15-inch shell at a piece of tissue paper and it came back and hit you. On consideration, I realized that this scattering backwards ... [meant] ... the greatest part of the mass of the atom was concentrated in a tiny nucleus.” In 1911, Rutherford published his analysis together with a proposed model of the atom, which was in part based on Geiger’s work from the previous year. As a result of the paper, the size of the nucleus was determined to be about m, or 100,000 times smaller than the atom. That implies a huge density, on the order of g/

PDF page 738: it is energized to the point at which it begins to radiate energy or emit light. The radiated light is channeled by a thin slit and then passed through a diffraction grating, which will separate the light into its constituent wavelengths. The separated light will then strike the photographic film on the right. The line spectrum shown in part (b) of Figure 22.5 is the output shown on the film for excited iron. Note that this spectrum is not continuous but discrete. In other words, only particular wavelengths are emitted by the iron source. Why would that be the case?

PDF page 738: it is energized to the point at which it begins to radiate energy or emit light. The radiated light is channeled by a thin slit and then passed through a diffraction grating, which will separate the light into its constituent wavelengths. The separated light will then strike the photographic film on the right. The line spectrum shown in part (b) of Figure 22.5 is the output shown on the film for excited iron. Note that this spectrum is not continuous but discrete. In other words, only particular wavelengths are emitted by the iron source. Why would that be the case?

PDF page 739: of the Balmer series is in the visible spectrum, while the Lyman series is entirely in the ultraviolet, and the Paschen series and others are in the infrared. Values of nf and ni are shown for some of the lines. Their importance will be described shortly. Just as an emission spectrum shows all discrete wavelengths emitted by a gas, an absorption spectrum will show all light that is absorbed by a gas. Black lines exist where the wavelengths are absorbed, with the remainder of the spectrum lit by light is free to pass through. What relationship do you think exists between the black lines of a gas’s absorption spectrum and the colored lines of its emission spectrum? Figure 22.7 shows the absorption spectrum of the Sun. The black lines are called Fraunhofer lines, and they correspond to the wavelengths absorbed by gases in the Sun’s exterior.