Atomic Models: A Comparative Journey
Slide 1: Title Slide
The Evolution of the Atom: Similarities and Differences
in Atomic Models
Group Members:
Ibrahim Awais
Ryan mahmood
Asadullah Nasir
Asadullah Khan
Date:
2 OCTOBER 2025
Slide 2: Introduction: Why Did the Model Change?
The Evolving Atom
Goal: To understand how successive scientific discoveries refined our view of the atom,
from a simple, solid ball to a complex, probabilistic cloud.
The Core Idea:
An atomic model is a theoretical framework explaining the structure and behavior of
atoms based on available experimental evidence.
Each new model was proposed because the previous model failed to explain new
experimental results (e.g., how light is emitted, why electrons don't crash into the
nucleus).
Key Models Covered:
Dalton, Thomson, Rutherford, Bohr, Schrödinger, and Chadwick.
Slide 3: Fundamental Similarities (Part 1)
All Models Agree on the Atom's Purpose
1. The Foundation (Dalton, 1803):
All matter is composed of tiny, fundamental particles called atoms.
This core assumption remains the basis of all subsequent models.
2. The Central Concentration (Post-Rutherford, 1911):
Models from Rutherford onward agree that the atom has a tiny, dense, central core
called the nucleus.
This nucleus contains almost all of the atom's mass.
3. Mostly Empty Space:
From Rutherford's Gold Foil Experiment, all modern models acknowledge that the atom
is overwhelmingly empty space (99.9% or more).
Slide 4: Fundamental Similarities (Part 2)
Agreement on Subatomic Particles and Charge
1. Presence of Subatomic Particles (Post-Thomson, 1897):
All models after Dalton include the fundamental concept of subatomic particles
(electrons, and later, protons and neutrons).
Dalton's idea of an "indivisible" atom was the first major similarity to be disproven.
2. Electrical Neutrality (Post-Thomson):
The atom is generally electrically neutral.
The total number of negatively charged particles (electrons) must equal the total
number of positively charged particles (protons).
3. Location of Protons & Neutrons (Post-Chadwick, 1932):
In the most accurate models (Bohr, Schrödinger), the massive particles (protons and
neutrons) are confined to the nucleus.
Slide 5: Key Differences: Structure and
Composition
| Scientist | Year | Model Analogy | Key Difference in Structure |
| Dalton | 1803 | Solid Sphere (Billiard Ball) | Indivisible particle with no internal structure.
|
| Thomson | 1904 | Plum Pudding | Divisible; positive mass is spread throughout the
sphere; negative electrons are embedded within it. |
| Rutherford | 1911 | Nuclear/Planetary | Introduced the Nucleus (tiny, dense positive
center); electrons orbit randomly in empty space. |
Limitation of Rutherford: Classical physics predicted that the orbiting electrons should
continuously lose energy and spiral into the nucleus, making the atom unstable.
Slide 6: Key Differences: Electron Behavior
(Classical vs. Quantum)
| Scientist | Year | Electron Behavior | Key Difference in Movement |
| Rutherford | 1911 | Classical Orbits | Electrons could orbit at any distance, leading to
atomic collapse. |
| Bohr | 1913 | Quantized Orbits | Electrons move in specific, fixed-energy paths (shells)
and can only jump between these levels. |
| Schrödinger | 1926 | Quantum Mechanical | Electrons are treated as waves; their
position cannot be known precisely, only their probability within an orbital (electron cloud).
|
Shift from Orbits to Orbitals:
Orbit (Bohr): A fixed, two-dimensional path (like a planet).
Orbital (Schrödinger): A three-dimensional region of space where an electron is most
likely to be found (like a cloud).
Slide 7: The Completing Piece: Chadwick and the
Neutron
The Problem of Mass
After Rutherford, the nucleus was thought to contain only protons (positive charge).
However, the mass of most atoms was always greater than the mass of the protons
alone.
| Scientist | Year | Contribution | Why it was Necessary |
| Chadwick | 1932 | Discovered the Neutron (neutral particle). | Explained the missing
mass and helped stabilize the nucleus (by separating positive protons and reducing
electrical repulsion). |
Final Picture: The nucleus is made of Protons (charge +1) and Neutrons (charge 0).
Slide 8: Comparative Summary of Models
| Model | Subatomic Particles? | Has a Nucleus? | Electron Location | Main Limitation |
| Dalton | No | No | N/A (Solid Sphere) | Didn't account for subatomic particles (electrons).
|
| Thomson | Yes (e$^-) No Embeddedinpositive"pudding." Couldn
′texplaintheresultsofthegoldfoilexperiment(deflection). Rutherford Yes(e^-,p^
+) Yes (small,dense) Orbitingrandomly. Failedtoexplainwhyelectronsdidn
′tspiralintothenucleus. Bohr Yes(e^-,p^+) Yes Fixed, quantizedorbits/
shells . Onlyworkedperfectlyforthesingle
−electronHydrogenatom. Schro¨dinger Yes(e^-,p^+,n^0$) | Yes | Orbitals (regions
of probability). | Highly complex mathematics (still the most accurate model). |
Slide 9: Conclusion: The Scientific Method
Progress Through Iteration
The history of the atomic model is a perfect example of the scientific process:
1.
Hypothesis/Model (e.g., Dalton, Thomson).
2.
Experimentation (e.g., Gold Foil, Cathode Ray).
3.
Observation that contradicts the current model.
4.
Refinement/Replacement with a new, more accurate model (e.g., Rutherford, Bohr,
Schrödinger).
Our current understanding (The Quantum Mechanical Model) is the most accurate, but
is still considered a model, subject to future refinements as technology advances.
Slide 10: Thank You & Q&A
Questions & Discussion
References: