Rutherford's atomic model 's limitation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the limitations of Rutherford's atomic model, particularly regarding the stability of atoms and the behavior of electrons. Participants explore the implications of classical electromagnetic theory on atomic structure, the transition to quantum mechanics, and the nature of electron orbitals.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that according to classical electromagnetic theory, electrons in circular orbits would emit radiation and spiral into the nucleus, leading to atomic collapse, which contradicts observed stability.
  • Others argue that while Rutherford's model is visually intuitive, it does not accurately represent atomic behavior, as electrons are not simply orbiting like planets.
  • A participant notes that the discovery of quantum mechanics provided a framework for understanding atomic stability, suggesting that electrons do not follow continuous trajectories.
  • There is a discussion on the nature of electron orbitals, with questions about whether the probability clouds are planar or spherical, and how they relate to magnetic moments.
  • Some participants mention that certain orbitals can have net currents and magnetic moments, but these distributions do not resemble classical orbits.
  • One participant raises a question about the orientation of magnetic moments in relation to external magnetic fields and seeks an equivalent quantum mechanical equation for calculating these properties.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the limitations of Rutherford's model but express differing views on the implications of quantum mechanics and the nature of electron behavior. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specifics of electron orbital distributions and their orientations.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding assumptions about classical mechanics and quantum mechanics, as well as the definitions of terms like "orbital" and "probability cloud." The relationship between classical and quantum descriptions of atomic structure is not fully resolved.

Deathnote777
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
In Rutherford's atomic model, electrons are in circular orbit around nucleus. My teacher said, "It has limitation. According to classical electromagnetic theory, the electrons are acceration and they will emit radiation and lose energy. And finally spiral into nucleus. Th atom will collapse if Rutherford is correct. But in reality atom doesn't collapse so the model has limitation."

I get confused. Doesn't the electron orbit around the nucleus in reality? Why Rutherford is wrong ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Deathnote777 said:
In Rutherford's atomic model, electrons are in circular orbit around nucleus. My teacher said, "It has limitation. According to classical electromagnetic theory, the electrons are acceration and they will emit radiation and lose energy. And finally spiral into nucleus. Th atom will collapse if Rutherford is correct. But in reality atom doesn't collapse so the model has limitation."

I get confused. Doesn't the electron orbit around the nucleus in reality? Why Rutherford is wrong ?

Your teacher is right; if electrons really were little teeny objects orbiting the nucleus just as the planets orbit the sun, then atoms would be unstable. And they aren't, so we know that model is not accurate. However, it is a very easy model to visualize, and it is good enough for a fair amount of practical physics... So the idea took hold in the popular imagination, and it's been there ever since.

Meanwhile, physicists of the late 19th century considered this to be one of their great unsolved problems: scattering experiments showed that atoms behaved as if they had a very small very dense positive-charged center surrounded by a very light positive-charged electrons; but no one could explain how such a structure could be stable.

It took the discovery of quantum mechanics to answer the question. No, electrons are NOT little teeny objects orbiting the nucleus just as the planets orbit the sun. If you want a reasonable visual/intuitive representation of what's going on, you can try searching Google images for "electron orbitals".
 
Nugatory said:
No, electrons are NOT little teeny objects orbiting the nucleus just as the planets orbit the sun.

And yet we have electron orbital magnetic dipole moment that is, or at least can be, derived by classical mechanics. So the question is how could such magnetic moment be created if electrons don't actually have continuous trajectories (in order to have velocity), but instead disappeared and popped up into existence from place to place.

In any case the average, or most probable, distance of electrons in certain shells is more or less constant, describing some circle, ellipse, sphere, or whatever other shape, with certain thickness. What I'd like to know is whether this orbital shell or probability cloud in Hydrogen atom lays in a plane or is distributed over sphere.
 
Last edited:
MarkoniF said:
What I'd like to know is whether this orbital shell or probability cloud in Hydrogen atom lays in a plane or is distributed over sphere.


Like I said, google for images of "electron orbitals"... But no, the probability distributions do not lie in a plane.
 
Nugatory said:
Like I said, google for images of "electron orbitals"... But no, the probability distributions do not lie in a plane.

It's hard to tell from 2D pictures. The thing is these orbital magnetic moments can have definite orientation, especially under influence of external magnetic field when they all align to point in the same direction.
 
MarkoniF, some orbitals have a net current, and therefore, a net magnetic moment. The distribution, however, is still 3-dimensional and looks nothing like classical orbits.
 
K^2 said:
MarkoniF, some orbitals have a net current, and therefore, a net magnetic moment. The distribution, however, is still 3-dimensional and looks nothing like classical orbits.

When these orbital magnetic moments align to point in the same direction under influence of external magnetic field, as is the case with diamagnetic materials, what is it then that defines their orientation if not vector perpendicular to the plane of electron orbit? I know classical equations can be used to calculate both magnitude and orientation, what is equivalent QM equation for that?
 
It's a complicated enough problem. If you ignore thermal excitations, the valence orbitals will be in super-position that minimizes energy in magnetic field.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
7K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K