A doubt on Rutherford's Scattering experiment

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Rutherford's scattering experiment, specifically addressing questions related to the underlying models of atomic structure, such as the plum pudding model and the nuclear model. Participants are exploring the implications of these models on the behavior of alpha particles during scattering events.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express frustration over the format of the question being presented in an image rather than text, which complicates the discussion.
  • One participant critiques the bullet analogy used to explain the scattering process, suggesting it is imperfect but could still be useful if the question is articulated clearly in the thread.
  • Another participant argues that the expectation of force during scattering is related to the location of charge rather than mass, explaining the differences between the plum pudding model and the nuclear model in terms of electric repulsion experienced by alpha particles.
  • This participant elaborates that in the plum pudding model, the positive charge is spread out, leading to diminishing force as the alpha particle approaches the center, while in the nuclear model, the charge is concentrated, resulting in a significantly greater force at closer distances.
  • The discussion includes a mention of Gauss' law to support the argument about the distribution of charge and its effects on force experienced by the alpha particles.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not appear to reach a consensus, as there are differing views on the effectiveness of the analogies used and the implications of the atomic models on the scattering process.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the clarity of the initial question and the assumptions underlying the models being debated, particularly regarding the distribution of charge and its impact on scattering outcomes.

Rishabh Narula
Messages
61
Reaction score
5
Please refer to the image attached for the question.thanks.
 

Attachments

  • pf mf doubt 8.jpg
    pf mf doubt 8.jpg
    76 KB · Views: 480
Physics news on Phys.org
Rishabh Narula said:
Please refer to the image attached for the question.thanks.

Why are you unable to post your question on here rather than on the document. It makes for quoting the exact parts of your question tedious!

Zz.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: RPinPA
Your bullet analogy is imperfect but can work. Post the text and your question HERE if you want to know more.
 
The expectation has nothing to do with where the mass is located. It is all about where the CHARGE is located. In the plum pudding model the positive charge of the atom is spread evenly throughout a sphere the size of the atom. The electrons are buried in the positive charge. As the alpha particle approaches an atom it feels the electric repulsion from the positive charge (forget the electrons for a second). However the maximum force is felt at the surface of the atom. Beyond that the force diminishes. Think of Gauss’ law. All of the positive charge outside the radius currently reached by the alpha particle imparts no net force. As the alpha particle approaches the center of the atom, the electric repulsion actually goes to zero. Contrast this with the nuclear model with all the charge concentrated at the center. The alpha particle can feel the full force of the nuclear charge at 1/100000 the radius. The force is proportional to 1/r^2, so the largest possible force is 1E10 greater than is possible in the plum pudding model! Of course you have to integrate force over the interaction time to get the maximum possible impulse in each model. However, you can appreciate how the maximum possible impulse in the nuclear model is still tremendously greater than in the plum pudding model.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Rishabh Narula

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K