B Who drew the first model of the atom?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on identifying the first person to draw a model of the atom resembling a common scientific logo. Participants mention that Rutherford first conceptualized the atomic structure in 1908, describing it as a mini-solar system, while Bohr later refined this model with energy levels. There is confusion about the accuracy of the drawing, particularly regarding the representation of orbits as ellipses instead of circles, which aligns with Bohr's model. The conversation also touches on the artistic origins of the logo used by the forum, with humorous references to its creator. Overall, the quest for the original sketch remains unresolved, highlighting the complexities of atomic theory history.
William Chua
Messages
4
Reaction score
2
Does anybody know who first drew (not just described but actually drew, even roughly) a model of the atom like the one below, and when:
rutherford-atom-for-carbon_lg.jpg

I'd appreciate it if anybody can point me to an evidence.
 

Attachments

  • rutherford-atom-for-carbon_lg.jpg
    rutherford-atom-for-carbon_lg.jpg
    28.1 KB · Views: 11,468
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • Like
Likes William Chua
Have you searched the Internet for "History of the Atom"?
 
  • Like
Likes William Chua and berkeman
I was hoping someone could point me to sketches like these:
bohr sketch 1.jpg
bohr sketch 2.jpg

I was told these were sketches done by Bohr but it doesn't quite look like the image I was looking for (the one I posted earlier.) It's a very ubiquitous picture. I see it in almost every logo that has something to do with science. But I can't figure out who really first drew that picture. Was it Bohr? Or Rutherford? Or maybe someone else?
 

Attachments

  • bohr sketch 1.jpg
    bohr sketch 1.jpg
    6.9 KB · Views: 1,270
  • bohr sketch 2.jpg
    bohr sketch 2.jpg
    2.4 KB · Views: 1,215
William Chua said:
I see it in almost every logo that has something to do with science.
Like the PF logo... :wink:
 
  • Like
Likes William Chua
William Chua said:
I I see it in almost every logo that has something to do with science. But I can't figure out who really first drew that picture. Was it Bohr? Or Rutherford? Or maybe someone else?
I think it *is* just a logo, based on that Bohr sketch on the right.
 
  • Like
Likes William Chua
berkeman said:
Like the PF logo... :wink:
Hahaha! Thanks for pointing that out. I didn't notice that! :smile:
But, really, I'm curious who made that drawing first and when.
 
William Chua said:
Hahaha! Thanks for pointing that out. I didn't notice that! :smile:
But, really, I'm curious who made that drawing first and when.
Pretty sure it was @Greg Bernhardt when he updated the forum software about a year ago... :biggrin:
 
  • Like
Likes William Chua and russ_watters
berkeman said:
Pretty sure it was @Greg Bernhardt when he updated the forum software about a year ago... :biggrin:
But I'm also pretty sure @Greg Bernhardt is too young to have done it first. :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Likes Greg Bernhardt and berkeman
  • #10
William Chua said:
But I'm also pretty sure @Greg Bernhardt is too young to have done it first. :rolleyes:

The first scientist to have a glimpse of the true nature of the atoms was Rutherford. In his experiments (called the Geiger-Mardsen experiments) in 1908, when using golden foils and alpha particles he was able to determine the localization of the positive part of the atom, as the centre of it, and its distance from the electrons or electronic cloud. According to Rutherford, it looked like a mini-solar system, with the negative electrons spinning around the nucleus (positive) like planets around the sun. Bohr refined this system afterwards, to include his energy-level's theory.
 
  • #11
I'm also very interested in this question. I wasn't able to find a good source about the history of the that drawing, but I confess I didn't do that much research...

What puzzles me is that the drawing uses ellipses to represent the orbits, while Bohr's orbits are circular. So in a sense, it doesn't correspond to any actual theory that was proposed about the atom.
 
  • #12
It should be pointed out that your original picture is enormously inaccurate regarding the size of the nucleus. It is drawn about five orders of magnitude bigger than its actual size.
 
  • Like
Likes DrClaude
  • #13
DrClaude said:
What puzzles me is that the drawing uses ellipses to represent the orbits, while Bohr's orbits are circular. So in a sense, it doesn't correspond to any actual theory that was proposed about the atom.
A circle viewed obliquely appears elliptical.
 
  • Like
Likes DrClaude
  • #14
DrClaude said:
What puzzles me is that the drawing uses ellipses to represent the orbits, while Bohr's orbits are circular. So in a sense, it doesn't correspond to any actual theory that was proposed about the atom.
Didn't Sommerfeld's extension of the original Bohr model use elliptical orbits?
 
  • Like
Likes DrClaude
Back
Top