Atomic Structure: Theory vs Observation

[Chaitanya V]

Does atom really looks and behaves like as that explained in quantum mechanical model?
Or is it just a Mathematical Tool to express the observations?
Is it like that that scientist were unable to find any clue about real atomic structure and just created a mathematical tools following the observations to satisfy the conditions?

 

[ZapperZ]

Does atom really looks and behaves like as that explained in quantum mechanical model?
Or is it just a Mathematical Tool to express the observations?
Is it like that that scientist were unable to find any clue about real atomic structure and just created a mathematical tools following the observations to satisfy the conditions?

This makes no sense.

Apply this to "gravity" or "electrostatic". Do you think the same way about electricity?

The ONLY means we have is to compare our theoretical description with experimental results. It is what separate science from unverified ideas, and it is MORE than what other non-science areas are able to do!

If doing this makes science just a "mathematical tool", then other parts of your world are no better than random speculation.

Zz.

 

[jfizzix]

Does atom really looks and behaves like as that explained in quantum mechanical model?
Or is it just a Mathematical Tool to express the observations?
Is it like that that scientist were unable to find any clue about real atomic structure and just created a mathematical tools following the observations to satisfy the conditions?

Well, with a great deal of experimental effort, we can take pictures of the electron cloud in an atom, and see that it obeys our predictions from quantum mechanics. See, for example:
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article-pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.213001

So long story short, yes, they really look and behave like that, at least as far as we've been able to tell.