011-40705070  or
Select Board & Class
• Select Board
• Select Class

# j.j thomson model of an atom explain in dettail with pic...for my project..

Asked by Dhruv Dewett(BLOSSOM PUBLIC SCHOOL) , on 29/10/13

Posted by Mohit Guptaon 30/10/13

This conversation is already closed by Expert

Thomson 's Atomic Model

 [J. J. Thomson 's raisin bread model (plum pudding model)] J. J. Thomson considered that the structure of an atom is something like a raisin bread, so that his atomic model is sometimes called the raisin bread model. He assumed that the basic body of an atom is a spherical object containing N electrons confined in homogeneous jellylike but relatively massive positive charge distribution whose total charge cancels that of the N electrons. The schematic drawing of this model is shown in the following figure. Thomson 's model is sometimes dubbed a plum pudding model.

 [Thomson 's Model and Alpha Particle Scattering] As stated on the preceding page, Geiger and Marsden carried out an experiment in which the alpha rays were collided against a thin metal foil. Their results showed that almost all incident alpha particles penetrate the foil and go straight in forward direction but a few are scattered in very large angles. Is it possible to explain this result by using Thomson 's model? This question will be studied below, but before explaining it, let us present the answer in advance: The results of the alpha particle scattering cannot be explained by Thomson 's atomic model. Thomson 's raisin bread model (plum pudding model) therefore cannot be valid as an atomic model. The reason will be explained below. Since we need somewhat detailed mathematical expressions, it will be given on the other page, 2-4-A: Alpha Particle Scattering by Thomson 's model As seen on the other page (2-4-A), we can consider that the scattering angle of the alpha particle by Thomson 's model is at most 0.01 degrees. The thickness of the metal foil in the scattering experiment of the alpha rays is about 10-6 m. When assuming that the atoms are tightly packed in the metal, there are about 10000 atoms lining up in the direction of thickness, because the size of an atom is approximately 10-10m. (See the following figure.) When the alpha particle collides with these atoms in the metal foil 10000 times successively, the scattering angle of each individual collision in such a multiple scattering is less than 0.01 degrees as discussed above. The resultant scattering angle is obtained by an accumulation of these individual scatterings of 10000 times. One may expect that, even if the scattering angle of each individual scattering is very small like 0.01 degrees, we can have as large resultant angle as This is however unrealistic, because the direction of each individual scattering must be random, and an accumulation of random values would give nearly zero only. So that we never obtain such a large resultant scattering angle after the multiple scattering. Accordingly, such a large scattering angle as those obtained in Geiger and Marsden 's experiment cannot be reproduced by such a multiple scattering as stated above. Thus we can conclude that Thomson 's atomic model is not held.

any other...i alsread ysaw htis in net..

Posted by Shwetha Boobalan(bharathi vidyalaya senior secondary school) on 3/1/12

With the growing evidence that the atom is composed of even smaller particles, attention was given to how the particles fit together. In the early 1900s J. J. Thomson reasoned that because electrons comprise only a very small fraction of the mass of an atom, they probably were responsible for an equally small fraction of the atom 's size. He proposed that the atom consisted of a uniform positive sphere of matter in which the electrons were embedded, as shown in Figure 2.8. This model became known as the "plum-pudding" model, after the name of a traditional English dessert. Thomson 's atomic model was very short-lived.

Figure 2.8  J. J. Thomson 's "plum-pudding" model of the atom. He pictured the small electrons to be embedded in the atom much like raisins in a pudding or like seeds in a watermelon. Ernest Rutherford proved this model wrong.

hope dis 1 will help!! : )

Posted by Sonalon 3/1/12

thx..bt not satisfied...any way thx

Posted by Shwetha Boobalan(bharathi vidyalaya senior secondary school) on 3/1/12

ok i wil try 2 give u another anser!! : ))

Posted by Sonalon 3/1/12

A schematic presentation of the plum pudding model of the atom. In Thomson 's mathematical model the "corpuscles" (or modern electrons) were arranged non-randomly, in rotating rings.

The plum pudding model of the atom by J. J. Thomson, who discovered the electron in 1897, was proposed in 1904 before the discovery of the atomic nucleus in order to add the electron to the atomic model. In this model, the atom is composed of electrons (which Thomson still called "corpuscles", thoughG. J. Stoney had proposed that atoms of electricity be called electrons in 1894 [1] ) surrounded by a soup of positive charge to balance the electrons ' negative charges, like negatively-charged "plums" surrounded by positively-charged "pudding". The electrons (as we know them today) were thought to be positioned throughout the atom, but with many structures possible for positioning multiple electrons, particularly rotating rings of electrons (see below). Instead of a soup, the atom was also sometimes said to have had a "cloud" of positive charge.

With this model, Thomson abandoned his earlier "nebular atom" hypothesis in which the atom was composed of immaterial vorticies. Now, at least part of the atom was to be composed of Thomson 's particulate negative corpuscles, although the rest of the positively-charged part of the atom remained somewhat nebulous and ill-defined.

The 1904 Thomson model was disproved by the 1909 gold foil experiment, which was interpreted by Ernest Rutherford in 1911 [2]   [3]  to imply a very small nucleus of the atom containing a very high positive charge (in the case of gold, enough to balance about 100 electrons), thus leading to the Rutherford modelof the atom. Although gold has an atomic number of 79, immediately after Rutherford 's paper appeared in 1911 Antonius Van den Broek made the intuitive suggestion that atomic number is nuclear charge. The matter required experiment to decide. Henry Moseley 's work showed experimentally in 1913 (seeMoseley 's law) that the effective nuclear charge was very close to the atomic number (Moseley found only one unit difference), and Moseley referenced only the papers of Van den Broek and Rutherford. This work culminated in the solar-system-like (but quantum-limited) Bohr model of the atom in the same year, in which a nucleus containing an atomic number of positive charge is surrounded by an equal number of electrons in orbital shells. Bohr had also inspired Moseley 's work.

Thomson 's model was compared (though not by Thomson) to a British dessert called plum pudding, hence the name. Thomson 's paper was published in the March 1904 edition of the  Philosophical Magazine , the leading British science journal of the day. In Thomson 's view:

... the atoms of the elements consist of a number of negatively electrified corpuscles enclosed in a sphere of uniform positive electrification, ... [4]

In this model, the electrons were free to rotate within the blob or cloud of positive substance. These orbits were stabilized in the model by the fact that when an electron moved farther from the center of the positive cloud, it felt a larger net positive inward force, because there was more material of opposite charge, inside its orbit (see Gauss 's law). In Thomson 's model, electrons were free to rotate in rings which were further stabilized by interactions between the electrons, and spectra were to be accounted for by energy differences of different ring orbits. Thomson attempted to make his model account for some of the major spectral lines known for some elements, but was not notably successful at this. Still, Thomson 's model (along with a similar Saturnian ring model for atomic electrons, also put forward in 1904 by Nagaoka after James Clerk Maxwell 's model of Saturn 's rings), were earlier harbingers of the later and more successful solar-system-like Bohr model of the atom.

hope dis 1 will help !!

Posted by Sonalon 3/1/12

nice ans..can u explain me Bohr 's model of atom plzzz. sure thumbs up

ok wait a min.

Posted by Sonalon 3/1/12

the planetary model of an atom depicts the atom as a nucleus surrounded by revolving electrons, kind of like the solar system.

but we know  that any charged body in motion radiates energy. so technically the electrons should lose energy and eventually spiral into the nucleus.

But this does not happen.

To explain that neils bohr came up with a new model of the atom with certain conditions.

Bohrs model asserts that

* The planetary model is correct
* An electron move in discrete orbits and during this it does not radiate(lose)energy.

Posted by Sonalon 3/1/12

more than dis...any way thank u very much for ur ans..

rutherford 's model of an atom depicts that in an atom there are electrons which revolve around the nucleus and and radiate energy so  technically the electrons should lose energy and eventually spiral into the nucleus.

but this ds not happen

To explain that neils bohr came up with a new model of the atom with certain conditions.

Bohrs model asserts that:

the electrons revolve around the nucleus but only in discrete orbits

when they revolve in discrete orbit they do not lose energy

hope u hv understood frm dis 1!!

Posted by Sonalon 3/1/12

do u want the answer for ur project or do u want to understand the model simply!!

Posted by Sonalon 3/1/12

i wnt a report on it

ok then i will giv u anthr ans..

Posted by Sonalon 3/1/12

In   atomic physics , the   Bohr model , introduced by   Niels Bohr   in 1913, depicts the   atom   as a small, positively charged   nucleus   surrounded by   electrons   that travel in circular orbits around the nucleus—similar in structure to the   solar system , but with   electrostatic forces   providing attraction, rather than   gravity . This was an improvement on the earlier   cubic model   (1902), the   plum-pudding model   (1904), the   Saturnian model   (1904), and the   Rutherford model   (1911). Since the Bohr model is a quantum-physics–based modification of the Rutherford model, many sources combine the two, referring to the   Rutherford–Bohr model .

The model 's key success lay in explaining the Rydberg formula for the spectral emission lines of atomic hydrogen. While the Rydberg formula had been known experimentally, it did not gain a theoretical underpinning until the Bohr model was introduced. Not only did the Bohr model explain the reason for the structure of the Rydberg formula, it also provided a justification for its empirical results in terms of fundamental physical constants.

The Bohr model is a primitive model of the hydrogen atom. As a theory, it can be derived as a first-order approximation of the hydrogen atom using the broader and much more accurate quantum mechanics, and thus may be considered to be an obsolete scientific theory. However, because of its simplicity, and its correct results for selected systems (see below for application), the Bohr model is still commonly taught to introduce students to quantum mechanics, before moving on to the more accurate but more complex valence shell atom. A related model was originally proposed by Arthur Erich Haas in 1910, but was rejected. The quantum theory of the period between Planck 's discovery of the quantum (1900) and the advent of a full-blown quantum mechanics (1925) is often referred to as the old quantum theory.

The Rutherford–Bohr model of the hydrogen atom ( Z = 1) or a hydrogen-like ion ( Z > 1), where the negatively charged electron confined to an atomic shell encircles a small, positively charged atomic nucleusand where an electron jump between orbits is accompanied by an emitted or absorbed amount of electromagnetic energy (). [1]  The orbits in which the electron may travel are shown as grey circles; their radius increases as n 2, where n is the principal quantum number. The 3 → 2 transition depicted here produces the first line of the Balmer series, and for hydrogen ( Z = 1) it results in a photon of wavelength 656 nm (red light).

Posted by Sonalon 3/1/12

thank u

thomson model of an antom he best experiment in future & in past

Posted by Atifaslamon 18/6/12

some body give a thumps up!!!!!!

Posted by Shreejit Nairon 7/8/12

for wat?

Posted by Shwetha Boobalan(bharathi vidyalaya senior secondary school) on 15/8/12