alpha scattering experiment meaning

What is the 'Gold Foil Experiment'? The Geiger-Marsden experiments explained

Physicists got their first look at the structure of the atomic nucleus.

J.J. Thomson model of the atom

Gold foil experiments, rutherford model of the atom.

• The real atomic model

Additional Resources

Bibliography.

The Geiger-Marsden experiment, also called the gold foil experiment or the α-particle scattering experiments, refers to a series of early-20th-century experiments that gave physicists their first view of the structure of the atomic nucleus and the physics underlying the everyday world. It was first proposed by Nobel Prize -winning physicist Ernest Rutherford.

As familiar as terms like electron, proton and neutron are to us now, in the early 1900s, scientists had very little concept of the fundamental particles that made up atoms . 

In fact, until 1897, scientists believed that atoms had no internal structure and believed that they were an indivisible unit of matter. Even the label "atom" gives this impression, given that it's derived from the Greek word "atomos," meaning "indivisible." 

But that year, University of Cambridge physicist Joseph John Thomson discovered the electron and disproved the concept of the atom being unsplittable, according to Britannica . Thomson found that metals emitted negatively charged particles when illuminated with high-frequency light. 

His discovery of electrons also suggested that there were more elements to atomic structure. That's because matter is usually electrically neutral; so if atoms contain negatively charged particles, they must also contain a source of equivalent positive charge to balance out the negative charge.

By 1904, Thomson had suggested a "plum pudding model" of the atom in which an atom comprises a number of negatively charged electrons in a sphere of uniform positive charge,  distributed like blueberries in a muffin. 

The model had serious shortcomings, however — primarily the mysterious nature of this positively charged sphere. One scientist who was skeptical of this model of atoms was Rutherford, who won the Nobel Prize in chemistry for his 1899 discovery of a form of radioactive decay via α-particles — two protons and two neutrons bound together and identical to a helium -4 nucleus, even if the researchers of the time didn't know this.

Rutherford's Nobel-winning discovery of α particles formed the basis of the gold foil experiment, which cast doubt on the plum pudding model. His experiment would probe atomic structure with high-velocity α-particles emitted by a radioactive source. He initially handed off his investigation to two of his protégés, Ernest Marsden and Hans Geiger, according to Britannica . 

Rutherford reasoned that if Thomson's plum pudding model was correct, then when an α-particle hit a thin foil of gold, the particle should pass through with only the tiniest of deflections. This is because α-particles are 7,000 times more massive than the electrons that presumably made up the interior of the atom.

Marsden and Geiger conducted the experiments primarily at the Physical Laboratories of the University of Manchester in the U.K. between 1908 and 1913. 

The duo used a radioactive source of α-particles facing a thin sheet of gold or platinum surrounded by fluorescent screens that glowed when struck by the deflected particles, thus allowing the scientists to measure the angle of deflection. 

The research team calculated that if Thomson's model was correct, the maximum deflection should occur when the α-particle grazed an atom it encountered and thus experienced the maximum transverse electrostatic force. Even in this case, the plum pudding model predicted a maximum deflection angle of just 0.06 degrees. 

Of course, an α-particle passing through an extremely thin gold foil would still encounter about 1,000 atoms, and thus its deflections would be essentially random. Even with this random scattering, the maximum angle of refraction if Thomson's model was correct would be just over half a degree. The chance of an α-particle being reflected back was just 1 in 10^1,000 (1 followed by a thousand zeroes). 

Yet, when Geiger and Marsden conducted their eponymous experiment, they found that in about 2% of cases, the α-particle underwent large deflections. Even more shocking, around 1 in 10,000 α-particles were reflected directly back from the gold foil.

Rutherford explained just how extraordinary this result was, likening it to firing a 15-inch (38 centimeters) shell (projectile) at a sheet of tissue paper and having it bounce back at you, according to Britannica  

Extraordinary though they were, the results of the Geiger-Marsden experiments did not immediately cause a sensation in the physics community. Initially, the data were unnoticed or even ignored, according to the book "Quantum Physics: An Introduction" by J. Manners.

The results did have a profound effect on Rutherford, however, who in 1910 set about determining a model of atomic structure that would supersede Thomson's plum pudding model, Manners wrote in his book.

The Rutherford model of the atom, put forward in 1911, proposed a nucleus, where the majority of the particle's mass was concentrated, according to Britannica . Surrounding this tiny central core were electrons, and the distance at which they orbited determined the size of the atom. The model suggested that most of the atom was empty space.

When the α-particle approaches within 10^-13 meters of the compact nucleus of Rutherford's atomic model, it experiences a repulsive force around a million times more powerful than it would experience in the plum pudding model. This explains the large-angle scatterings seen in the Geiger-Marsden experiments.

Later Geiger-Marsden experiments were also instrumental; the 1913 tests helped determine the upper limits of the size of an atomic nucleus. These experiments revealed that the angle of scattering of the α-particle was proportional to the square of the charge of the atomic nucleus, or Z, according to the book "Quantum Physics of Matter," published in 2000 and edited by Alan Durrant.  

In 1920, James Chadwick used a similar experimental setup to determine the Z value for a number of metals. The British physicist went on to discover the neutron in 1932, delineating it as a separate particle from the proton, the American Physical Society said . 

What did the Rutherford model get right and wrong?

Yet the Rutherford model shared a critical problem with the earlier plum pudding model of the atom: The orbiting electrons in both models should be continuously emitting electromagnetic energy, which would cause them to lose energy and eventually spiral into the nucleus. In fact, the electrons in Rutherford's model should have lasted less than 10^-5 seconds. 

Another problem presented by Rutherford's model is that it doesn't account for the sizes of atoms. 

Despite these failings, the Rutherford model derived from the Geiger-Marsden experiments would become the inspiration for Niels Bohr 's atomic model of hydrogen , for which he won a Nobel Prize in Physics .

Bohr united Rutherford's atomic model with the quantum theories of Max Planck to determine that electrons in an atom can only take discrete energy values, thereby explaining why they remain stable around a nucleus unless emitting or absorbing a photon, or light particle.

Thus, the work of Rutherford, Geiger  (who later became famous for his invention of a radiation detector)  and Marsden helped to form the foundations of both quantum mechanics and particle physics. 

Rutherford's idea of firing a beam at a target was adapted to particle accelerators during the 20th century. Perhaps the ultimate example of this type of experiment is the Large Hadron Collider near Geneva, which accelerates beams of particles to near light speed and slams them together. 

• See a modern reconstruction of the Geiger-Marsden gold foil experiment conducted by BackstageScience and explained by particle physicist Bruce Kennedy . 
• Find out more about the Bohr model of the atom which would eventually replace the Rutherford atomic model. 
• Rutherford's protege Hans Gieger would eventually become famous for the invention of a radioactive detector, the Gieger counter. SciShow explains how they work .

Thomson's Atomic Model , Lumens Chemistry for Non-Majors,.

Rutherford Model, Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/science/Rutherford-model

Alpha particle, U.S NRC, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/basic-ref/glossary/alpha-particle.html

Manners. J., et al, 'Quantum Physics: An Introduction,' Open University, 2008. 

Durrant, A., et al, 'Quantum Physics of Matter,' Open University, 2008

Ernest Rutherford, Britannica , https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ernest-Rutherford

Niels Bohr, The Nobel Prize, https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1922/bohr/facts/

House. J. E., 'Origins of Quantum Theory,' Fundamentals of Quantum Mechanics (Third Edition) , 2018

Sign up for the Live Science daily newsletter now

Get the world’s most fascinating discoveries delivered straight to your inbox.

Robert Lea is a science journalist in the U.K. who specializes in science, space, physics, astronomy, astrophysics, cosmology, quantum mechanics and technology. Rob's articles have been published in Physics World, New Scientist, Astronomy Magazine, All About Space and ZME Science. He also writes about science communication for Elsevier and the European Journal of Physics. Rob holds a bachelor of science degree in physics and astronomy from the U.K.’s Open University

The universe had a secret life before the Big Bang, new study hints

World's fastest microscope can see electrons moving

Tonga eruption that poured 150 metric tons of water vapor into the stratosphere affected the atmosphere for years

Most Popular

• 2 When was the last time Antarctica was ice-free?
• 3 Mesmerizing animation shows Earth's tectonic plates moving from 1.8 billion years ago to today
• 4 Star-packed Triangulum Galaxy shines in new Hubble Telescope image
• 5 Scientists make lab-grown black hole jets

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center

What is the model of the atom proposed by Ernest Rutherford?

What is the rutherford gold-foil experiment, what were the results of rutherford's experiment, what did ernest rutherford's atomic model get right and wrong, what was the impact of ernest rutherford's theory.

Rutherford model

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• UC Davis - The Rutherford Scattering Experiment
• Chemistry LibreTexts - Rutherford's Experiment- The Nuclear Model of the Atom

The atom , as described by Ernest Rutherford , has a tiny, massive core called the nucleus . The nucleus has a positive charge. Electrons are particles with a negative charge. Electrons orbit the nucleus. The empty space between the nucleus and the electrons takes up most of the volume of the atom.

A piece of gold foil was hit with alpha particles , which have a positive charge. Most alpha particles went right through. This showed that the gold atoms were mostly empty space. Some particles had their paths bent at large angles. A few even bounced backward. The only way this would happen was if the atom had a small, heavy region of positive charge inside it.

The previous model of the atom, the Thomson atomic model , or the “plum pudding” model, in which negatively charged electrons were like the plums in the atom’s positively charged pudding, was disproved. The Rutherford atomic model relied on classical physics. The Bohr atomic model , relying on quantum mechanics, built upon the Rutherford model to explain the orbits of electrons.

The Rutherford atomic model was correct in that the atom is mostly empty space. Most of the mass is in the nucleus, and the nucleus is positively charged. Far from the nucleus are the negatively charged electrons. But the Rutherford atomic model used classical physics and not quantum mechanics. This meant that an electron circling the nucleus would give off electromagnetic radiation . The electron would lose energy and fall into the nucleus. In the Bohr model, which used quantum theory, the electrons exist only in specific orbits and can move between these orbits.​

The gold-foil experiment showed that the atom consists of a small, massive, positively charged nucleus with the negatively charged electrons being at a great distance from the centre. Niels Bohr built upon Rutherford’s model to make his own. In Bohr’s model the orbits of the electrons were explained by quantum mechanics.

Rutherford model , description of the structure of atoms proposed (1911) by the New Zealand-born physicist Ernest Rutherford . The model described the atom as a tiny, dense, positively charged core called a nucleus, in which nearly all the mass is concentrated, around which the light, negative constituents , called electrons , circulate at some distance, much like planets revolving around the Sun .

The nucleus was postulated as small and dense to account for the scattering of alpha particles from thin gold foil, as observed in a series of experiments performed by undergraduate Ernest Marsden under the direction of Rutherford and German physicist Hans Geiger in 1909. A radioactive source emitting alpha particles (i.e., positively charged particles, identical to the helium atom nucleus and 7,000 times more massive than electrons) was enclosed within a protective lead shield. The radiation was focused into a narrow beam after passing through a slit in a lead screen. A thin section of gold foil was placed in front of the slit, and a screen coated with zinc sulfide to render it fluorescent served as a counter to detect alpha particles. As each alpha particle struck the fluorescent screen , it produced a burst of light called a scintillation, which was visible through a viewing microscope attached to the back of the screen. The screen itself was movable, allowing Rutherford and his associates to determine whether or not any alpha particles were being deflected by the gold foil.

Most alpha particles passed straight through the gold foil, which implied that atoms are mostly composed of open space. Some alpha particles were deflected slightly, suggesting interactions with other positively charged particles within the atom. Still other alpha particles were scattered at large angles, while a very few even bounced back toward the source. (Rutherford famously said later, “It was almost as incredible as if you fired a 15-inch shell at a piece of tissue paper and it came back and hit you.”) Only a positively charged and relatively heavy target particle, such as the proposed nucleus, could account for such strong repulsion. The negative electrons that balanced electrically the positive nuclear charge were regarded as traveling in circular orbits about the nucleus. The electrostatic force of attraction between electrons and nucleus was likened to the gravitational force of attraction between the revolving planets and the Sun. Most of this planetary atom was open space and offered no resistance to the passage of the alpha particles.

The Rutherford model supplanted the “plum-pudding” atomic model of English physicist Sir J.J. Thomson , in which the electrons were embedded in a positively charged atom like plums in a pudding. Based wholly on classical physics , the Rutherford model itself was superseded in a few years by the Bohr atomic model , which incorporated some early quantum theory . See also atomic model .

previous    home    next

Rutherford Scattering

Michael Fowler, University of Virginia

Rutherford as Alpha-Male

[Rutherford was] a "tribal chief", as a student said.

(Richard Rhodes, The Making of the Atomic Bomb, page 46)

In 1908 Rutherford was awarded the Nobel Prize—for chemistry! The award citation read: "for his investigations into the disintegration of the elements, and the chemistry of radioactive substances." While at McGill University, he had discovered that the radioactive element thorium emitted a gas which was itself radioactive, but if the gas radioactivity was monitored separately from the thorium's, he found it decreased geometrically, losing approximately half its current strength for each minute that passed. The gas he had found was a short-lived isotope of radon, and this was the first determination of a "half-life" for a radioactive material. (Pais, Inward Bound , page 120).

The chemists were of course impressed that Rutherford was fulfilling their ancient alchemical dream of transmuting elements, or at least demonstrating that it happened. Rutherford himself remarked at the ceremony that he "had dealt with many different transformations with various time-periods, but the quickest he had met was his own transformation from a physicist to a chemist". Still, Nobel prizes of any kind are nice to get, so he played along, titling his official Nobel lecture: "The chemical nature of the alpha-particle from radioactive substances". (He established that his favorite particle was an ionized helium atom by collecting alphas in an evacuated container, where they picked up electrons. After compressing this very rarefied gas, he passed an electric discharge through it and observed the characteristic helium spectrum in the light emitted.)

Rutherford was the world leader in alpha-particle physics. In 1906, at McGill University, Montreal, he had been the first to detect slight deflections of alphas on passage through matter. In 1907, he became a professor at the University of Manchester, where he worked with Hans Geiger . This was just a year after Rutherford's old boss, J. J. Thomson , had written a paper on his plum pudding atomic model suggesting that the number of electrons in an atom was about the same as the atomic number. (Not long before, people had speculated that atoms might contain thousands of electrons. They were assuming that the electrons contributed a good fraction of the atom's mass.) The actual distribution of the electrons in the atom, though, was as mysterious as ever.  Mayer's floating magnets (see previous lecture) were fascinating, but had not led to any quantitative conclusions on electronic distributions in atoms.

Rutherford's 1906 discovery that his pet particles were slightly deflected on passing through atoms came about when he was finding their charge to mass ratio, by measuring the deflection in a magnetic field. He detected the alphas by letting them impact photographic film. When he had them pass through a thin sheet of mica before hitting the film (so the film didn't have to be in the vacuum?) he found the image was blurred at the edges, evidently the mica was deflecting the alphas through a degree or two. He also knew that the alphas wouldn't be deflected a detectable amount by the electrons in the atom, since the alphas weighed 8,000 times as much as the electrons, atoms contained only a few dozen electrons, and the alphas were very fast. The mass of the atom must be tied up somehow with the positive charge . Therefore, he reasoned, analyzing these small deflections might give some clue as to the distribution of positive charge and mass in the atom, and therefore give some insight into his old boss J. J.'s plum pudding. The electric fields necessary in the atom for the observed scattering already seemed surprisingly high to Rutherford (Pais, page 189).

Scattering Alphas

Rutherford's alpha scattering experiments were the first experiments in which individual particles were systematically scattered and detected. This is now the standard operating procedure of particle physics. To minimize alpha loss by scattering from air molecules, the experiment was carried out in a fairly good vacuum, the metal box being evacuated through a tube T (see below). The alphas came from a few milligrams of radium (to be precise, its decay product radon 222) at R in the figure below, from the original paper, which goes on:

" By means of a diaphragm placed at D, a pencil of alpha particles was directed normally on to the scattering foil F. By rotating the microscope [M] the alpha particles scattered in different directions could be observed on the screen S."

Actually, this was more difficult than it sounds. A single alpha caused a slight fluorescence on the zinc sulphide screen S at the end of the microscope. This could only be reliably seen by dark-adapted eyes (after half an hour in complete darkness) and one person could only count the flashes accurately for one minute before needing a break, and counts above 90 per minute were too fast for reliability. The experiment accumulated data from hundreds of thousands of flashes.

Rutherford's partner in the initial phase of this work was Hans Geiger, who later developed the Geiger counter to detect and count fast particles. Many hours of staring at the tiny zinc sulphide screen in the dark must have focused his mind on finding a better way!

In 1909, an undergraduate, Ernest Marsden, was being trained by Geiger. To quote Rutherford (a lecture he gave much later):

"I had observed the scattering of alpha-particles, and Dr. Geiger in my laboratory had examined it in detail. He found, in thin pieces of heavy metal, that the scattering was usually small, of the order of one degree.

"One day Geiger came to me and said, "Don't you think that young Marsden , whom I am training in radioactive methods, ought to begin a small research?" Now I had thought that, too, so I said, " Why not let him see if any alpha-particles can be scattered through a large angle?"

"I may tell you in confidence that I did not believe that they would be, since we knew the alpha-particle was a very fast, massive particle with a great deal of energy, and you could show that if the scattering was due to the accumulated effect of a number of small scatterings, the chance of an alpha-particle's being scattered backward was very small. Then I remember two or three days later Geiger coming to me in great excitement and saying "We have been able to get some of the alpha-particles coming backward …" It was quite the most incredible event that ever happened to me in my life. It was almost as incredible as if you fired a 15-inch shell at a piece of tissue paper and it came back and hit you."

Disproof of the Pudding

The back scattered alpha-particles proved fatal to the plum pudding model. A central assumption of that model was that both the positive charge and the mass of the atom were more or less uniformly distributed over its size, approximately 10 -10  meters across or a little more. It is not difficult to calculate the magnitude of electric field from this charge distribution. (Recall that this is the field that must scatter the alphas, the electrons are so light they will jump out of the way with negligible impact on an alpha.)

To be specific, let us consider the gold atom, since the foil used by Rutherford was of gold, beaten into leaf about 400 atoms thick. The gold atom has a positive charge of 79 e (balanced of course by that of the 79 electrons in its normal state). Neglect the electrons—they'll be scattered away with negligible impact on the heavy alpha.

See the animation here !

The maximum electric force the alpha will encounter is that at the surface of the sphere of positive charge,

E ⋅ 2 e = 1 4 π ε 0 ⋅ 79 e ⋅ 2 e r 0 2 = 9 ⋅ 10 9 158 ⋅ ( 1.6 ⋅ 10 − 19 ) 10 − 20 = 3.64 ⋅ 10 − 6  Newtons .  

(In this model, once inside the sphere the electric force goes down, just as gravity goes down on going deep into the earth, to zero at the center. But the sideways component stays approximately constant if the path is nearly a straight line.)

If the alpha particle initially has momentum  p , for small deflections the angle of deflection (in radians) is given by Δ p / p ,  where  Δ p is the sideways momentum resulting from the electrically repulsive force of the positive sphere of charge.

A good estimate of the sideways deflection is given by taking the alpha to experience the surface  force given above for a time interval equal to the time it takes the alpha to cross the atom—say, a distance 2 r 0 .   (The force felt when outside the ball of charge is much smaller: it drops away as the inverse square, but at an angle that makes it effectively inverse cube. It can be shown to make only a small contribution.)

Note that since the alpha particle has mass 6.7x10 -27  kg, from  F = m a , the electric force at the atomic surface above will give it a sideways acceleration of 5.4x10 20  meters per sec per sec (compare  g = 10 !). But the force doesn't have long to act—the alpha is moving at 1.6x10 7  meters per second. So the time available for the force to act is the time interval a particle needs to cross an atom if the particle gets from New York to Australia in one second.

So the transit time for the alpha across the plum pudding atom is:

t 0 = 2 r 0 / v = 2 × 10 10 / 1.6 × 10 7 = 1.25 × 10 − 17  seconds .  

Now, the magnitude of the total sideways velocity picked up on crossing the atom is the sideways acceleration multiplied by the time,

1.25 × 10 − 17 × 5.4 × 10 20 = 6750   m /sec .  

This is a few ten-thousandths of the alpha's forward speed , so there is only a very tiny deflection . Even if the alpha hit 400 atoms in succession and they all deflected it the same way, an astronomically improbable event, the deflection would only be of order a degree. Therefore, the observed deflection through ninety degrees and more was completely inexplicable using Thomson's pudding model!

Emergence of the Nucleus

Rutherford pondered the problem for some months. He had been a believer in his former boss's pudding model, but he eventually decided there was simply no way it could generate the strength of electric field necessary to deflect the fast moving alphas. Yet it was difficult to credit there was much more positive charge around than that necessary to compensate for the electrons, and it was pretty well established that there were not more than a hundred or so electrons (we used 79, the correct value—that was not known exactly until a little later). The electric field from a sphere of charge reaches its maximum on the surface, as discussed above. Therefore, for a given charge, assumed spherically distributed, the only way to get a stronger field is to compress it into a smaller sphere . Rutherford concluded that he could only explain the large alpha deflections if the positive charge, and most of the mass of the atom, was in a sphere much smaller than the atom itself .

It is not difficult to estimate from the above discussion how small such a nucleus would have to be to give a substantial deflection. We found a sphere of radius 10 -10  meters gave a deflection of about 4x10 -4  radians. We need to increase this deflection by a factor of a few thousand. On decreasing the radius of the sphere of positive charge, the force at the surface increases as the inverse radius squared . On the other hand, the time over which the alpha experiences the sideways force decreases as the radius.

The total deflection , then, proportional to the product of force and time, increases as the inverse of the radius . This forces the conclusion that the positive charge is in a sphere of radius certainly less than 10 -13  meters, provided all the observed scattering is caused by one encounter with a nucleus.

Animation of scattering from a nuclear atom here !

Rutherford decided that the observed scattering was in fact from a single nucleus. He argued as follows: since the foil is only 400 atoms thick, it is difficult to see how ninety degree scatterings could arise unless the scattering by a single nucleus was at least one degree, say 100 times that predicted by the Thomson model. This would imply that the nucleus had a radius at most one-hundredth that of the atom, and therefore presented a target area for one-degree scattering (or more) to the incoming alphas only one ten-thousandth that of the atom. (In particle physics jargon, this target area is called the scattering cross section .) If an alpha goes through 400 layers of atoms, and in each layer it has a chance of one in ten thousand of getting close enough to the nucleus for a one-degree scatter, this is unlikely to happen twice. It follows that almost certainly only one scattering takes place. It then follows that all ninety or more degrees of scattering must be a single event, so the nucleus must be even smaller than one hundredth the radius of the atom -- it must be less than 10 -13 meters, as stated above.

Seeing the Nucleus

Having decided that the observed scattering of the alphas came from single encounters with nuclei, and assuming that the scattering force was just the electrostatic repulsion, Rutherford realized maybe just scaling down the radius in the plum pudding analysis given above wasn't quite right. Maybe the nucleus was so small that the alpha particle didn't even touch it. If that were the case, the alpha particle's entire trajectory was determined by a force law of inverse square repulsion, and could be analyzed precisely mathematically by the techniques already well-known to astronomers for finding paths of planets under inverse square attraction.

It turns out that the alpha will follow a hyperbolic path (see the animation). Imagine an alpha coming in along an almost straight line path, the perpendicular distance of the nucleus from this line is called the impact parameter (how close to the center the alpha particle would pass if the repulsion were switched off).  The standard planetary math is enough to find the angle at which the alpha comes out (the scattering angle), given the impact parameter and speed.  Although not exactly a hot shot theorist, Rutherford managed to figure this out after a few weeks.

The incoming stream of alphas all have the same velocity (including direction) , but random impact parameters: we assume the beam intensity doesn't vary much in the perpendicular direction, certainly on an atomic scale, so we average over impact parameters (with a factor 2 π p d p  for the annular region   p , p + d p  ).

The bottom line is that for a nucleus of charge  Z , and incident alpha particles of mass  m and speed  v , the rate of scattering to a point on the screen corresponding to a scattering angle of  θ (angle between incident velocity and final velocity of alpha) is proportional to:

scattering into small area at  θ   ∝ ( 1 4 π ε 0 ⋅ Z e 2 m v 2 ) 2 ⋅ 1 sin 4 ( θ / 2 ) .  

Analysis of the hundred thousand or more scattering events recorded for the alphas on gold fully confirmed the angular dependence predicted by the above analysis.

Modeling the Scattering

To visualize the path of the alpha in such a scattering, Rutherford "had a model made, a heavy electromagnet suspended as a pendulum on thirty feet of wire that grazed the face of another electromagnet set on a table. With the two grazing faces matched in polarity and therefore repelling each other, the pendulum was deflected" into a hyperbolic path.(Rhodes, page 50)

But it didn't work for Aluminum...

On replacing the gold foil by aluminum foil (some years later), it turned out that small angle scattering obeyed the above law, but large angle scattering didn't. Rutherford correctly deduced that in the large angle scattering, which corresponded to closer approach to the nucleus, the alpha was actually hitting the nucleus. This meant that the size of the nucleus could be worked out by finding the maximum angle for which the inverse square scattering formula worked, and finding how close to the center of the nucleus such an alpha came. Rutherford estimated the radius of the aluminum nucleus to be about 10 -14  meters.

The Beginnings of Nuclear Physics

The First World War lasted from 1914 to 1918. Geiger and Marsden were both at the Western front, on opposite sides. Rutherford had a large water tank installed on the ground floor of the building in Manchester, to carry out research on defense against submarine attack. Nevertheless, occasional research on alpha scattering continued. Scattering from heavy nuclei was fully accounted for by the electrostatic repulsion, so Rutherford concentrated on light nuclei, including hydrogen and nitrogen. In 1919, Rutherford established that an alpha impinging on a nitrogen nucleus can cause a hydrogen atom to appear! Newspaper headlines blared that Rutherford had "split the atom". (Rhodes, page 137)

Shortly after that experiment, Rutherford moved back to Cambridge to succeed J. J. Thomson as head of the Cavendish laboratory, working with one of his former students, James Chadwick , who had spent the war years interned in Germany. They discovered many unusual effects with alpha scattering from light nuclei. In 1921, Chadwick and co-author Bieler wrote: "The present experiments do not seem to throw any light on the nature of the law of variation of the forces at the seat of an electric charge, but merely show that the forces are of great intensity … It is our task to find some field of force which will reproduce these effects." I took this quote from Pais, page 240, who goes on to say that he considers this 1921 statement as marking the birth of the strong interactions.

In fact, Rutherford was beginning to focus his attention on the actual construction of the nucleus and the alpha particle. He coined the word "proton" to describe the hydrogen nucleus, it first appeared in print in 1920 (Pais). At first, he thought the alpha must be made up of four of these protons somehow bound together by having two electrons in the middle—this would get the mass and charge right, but of course nobody could construct a plausible electrostatic configuration. Then he had the idea that maybe there was a special very tightly bound state of a proton and an electron, much smaller than an atom. By 1924, he and Chadwick were discussing how to detect this neutron. It wasn't going to be easy—it probably wouldn't leave much of a track in a cloud chamber. In fact, Chadwick did discover the neutron, but not until 1932, and it wasn't much like their imagined proton-electron bound state. But it did usher in the modern era in nuclear physics.

• Structure of Atom
• Rutherford Atomic Model And Its Limitations

Rutherford Atomic Model and Limitations

Define rutherford atomic model.

Rutherford Atomic Model – The plum pudding model given by J. J. Thomson failed to explain certain experimental results associated with the atomic structure of elements. Ernest Rutherford, a British scientist conducted an experiment and based on the observations of this experiment, he explained the atomic structure of elements and proposed Rutherford’s Atomic Model.

Table of Contents

• Rutherfords Alpha Scattering Experiment

Observations of Rutherford’s Alpha Scattering Experiment

Rutherford atomic model, limitations of rutherford atomic model, recommended videos, frequently asked questions – faqs.

Rutherford’s Alpha Scattering Experiment

Rutherford conducted an experiment by bombarding a thin sheet of gold with α-particles and then studied the trajectory of these particles after their interaction with the gold foil.

Rutherford, in his experiment, directed high energy streams of α-particles from a radioactive source at a thin sheet (100 nm thickness) of gold. In order to study the deflection caused to the α-particles, he placed a fluorescent zinc sulphide screen around the thin gold foil. Rutherford made certain observations that contradicted Thomson’s atomic model .

The observations made by Rutherford led him to conclude that:

• A major fraction of the α-particles bombarded towards the gold sheet passed through the sheet without any deflection, and hence most of the space in an atom is empty .
• Some of the α-particles were deflected by the gold sheet by very small angles, and hence the positive charge in an atom is not uniformly distributed . The positive charge in an atom is concentrated in a very small volume .
• Very few of the α-particles were deflected back, that is only a few α-particles had nearly 180 o angle of deflection. So the volume occupied by the positively charged particles in an atom is very small as compared to the total volume of an atom .

Based on the above observations and conclusions, Rutherford proposed the atomic structure of elements. According to the Rutherford atomic model:

• The positive charge and most of the mass of an atom is concentrated in an extremely small volume. He called this region of the atom as a nucleus.
• Rutherford’s model proposed that the negatively charged electrons surround the nucleus of an atom. He also claimed that the electrons surrounding the nucleus revolve around it with very high speed in circular paths. He named these circular paths as orbits.
• Electrons being negatively charged and nucleus being a densely concentrated mass of positively charged particles are held together by a strong electrostatic force of attraction.

Although the Rutherford atomic model was based on experimental observations, it failed to explain certain things.

• Rutherford proposed that the electrons revolve around the nucleus in fixed paths called orbits. According to Maxwell, accelerated charged particles emit electromagnetic radiations and hence an electron revolving around the nucleus should emit electromagnetic radiation. This radiation would carry energy from the motion of the electron which would come at the cost of shrinking of orbits. Ultimately the electrons would collapse in the nucleus. Calculations have shown that as per the Rutherford model, an electron would collapse into the nucleus in less than 10 -8 seconds. So the Rutherford model was not in accordance with Maxwell’s theory and could not explain the stability of an atom .
• One of the drawbacks of the Rutherford model was also that he did not say anything about the arrangement of electrons in an atom which made his theory incomplete.
• Although the early atomic models were inaccurate and failed to explain certain experimental results, they formed the base  for future developments in the world of quantum mechanics .

Register with BYJU’S to learn more topics of chemistry such as Hybridization, Atomic Structure models and more.

The Gold Foil Experiment

Structure of Atom Class 11 Chemistry

Drawbacks of Rutherford Atomic Model

What was the speciality of Rutherford’s atomic model?

Rutherford was the first to determine the presence of a nucleus in an atom. He bombarded α-particles on a gold sheet, which made him encounter the presence of positively charged specie inside the atom.

What is Rutherford’s atomic model?

Rutherford proposed the atomic structure of elements. He explained that a positively charged particle is present inside the atom, and most of the mass of an atom is concentrated over there. He also stated that negatively charged particles rotate around the nucleus, and there is an electrostatic force of attraction between them.

What are the limitations of Rutherford’s atomic model?

Rutherford failed to explain the arrangement of electrons in an atom. Like Maxwell, he was unable to explain the stability of the atom.

What kind of experiment did Rutherford’s perform?

Rutherford performed an alpha scattering experiment. He bombarded α-particles on a gold sheet and then studied the trajectory of these α-particles.

What was the primary observation of Rutherford’s atomic model?

Rutherford observed that a microscopic positively charged particle is present inside the atom, and most of the mass of an atom is concentrated over there.

Put your understanding of this concept to test by answering a few MCQs. Click ‘Start Quiz’ to begin!

Select the correct answer and click on the “Finish” button Check your score and answers at the end of the quiz

Visit BYJU’S for all Chemistry related queries and study materials

Your result is as below

Request OTP on Voice Call

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your Mobile number and Email id will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post My Comment

I am very much happy with the answer i got from this site, because you provide me with clearest and more understandable answer more than I expect. i really recommended the site, thanks.

What can I say, you people you’re the best! coz I tried to search for the failures of Rutherford any where and couldn’t but with you I found them. Thanks 🙏 I therefore recommend others to use this platform in order to get what they are searching for. I love guys

this clearer than I xpect. thanks alot

I am very happy with the answer that I obtained, however Ernest Rutherford’s Atomic Model never had any neutrons in the nucleus. James Chadwick discovered the neutron later in 1932. However, the limitations and observations of his theory on this web page seem to be correct.

It is very useful to me thaks

It’s a brilliant website with clear concept. Answers provided are really up to mark with best quality .

I ‘m contented with the explanation given. It seems much clearer with the interpretations following the observations.

I’m highly thankful to this website which made me clear about Rutherford method I was confused about this and worried also butt I’m now damn confident that it will surely help me and I’ll get good grades ❤️

Loads of love❤️

Register with BYJU'S & Download Free PDFs

Register with byju's & watch live videos.

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

Alpha scattering, observations and conclusions

For Rutherford's alpha scattering experiment where he fired alpha particles at a thin sheet of metal to determine the size of the nucleus, please can someone give me the direct link between his observations and his conclusions e.g. this observation lead to this conclusions.

• experimental-physics

This is a link with the conclusions from the experiment and which observations lead to which conclusions.

The Conclusion

When Rutherford mathematically investigated the results he proposed a model that explained the results that Geiger and Marsden obtained.

The fact that the vast majority of the alpha particles got straight through led Rutherford to propose that the atom was composed primarily of empty space.

The fact that backscattering occurred in 1 in 8000 alpha particles indicated that the nucleus was:

small (that was why so few were affected)

massive (meaning containing lots of mass - he knew the electrons had very little mass and the fact that all of the positive charges were concentrated into a small area meant that the mass was concentrated there too)

positively charged (because it repelled the alpha particles) nucleus in the centre of the atom (neutrons had not been discovered at that time - so he made no mention of them!).

All these are from the website linked.

Your Answer

Sign up or log in, post as a guest.

Required, but never shown

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy .

• Featured on Meta
• Announcing a change to the data-dump process
• Bringing clarity to status tag usage on meta sites

Hot Network Questions

• How to clean a female disconnect connector
• Is it helpful to use a thicker gauge wire for only part of a long circuit run that could have higher loads?
• Can the canonical Eudoxus-real representatives be defined easily?
• What is this movie aircraft?
• Compacting biological traits arising from emergent biological mechanisms into singular artificial genes
• Different definitions of vector rotation by quaternion.
• How would you read this time change with the given note equivalence?
• Using NDSolve to solve the PDEs and their reduced ODEs yields inconsistent results
• Can reinforcement learning rewards be a combination of current and new state?
• Blank export using Garamond fonts
• What was IBM VS/PC?
• Sum[] function not computing the sum
• I'm not quite sure I understand this daily puzzle on Lichess (9/6/24)
• What does "dare not" mean in a literary context?
• How cheap would rocket fuel have to be to make Mars colonization feasible (according to Musk)?
• Do US universities invite faculty applicants from outside the US for an interview?
• Is it a good idea to perform I2C Communication in the ISR?
• How high does the ocean tide rise every 90 minutes due to the gravitational pull of the space station?
• Pull up resistor question
• Is my magic enough to keep a person without skin alive for a month?
• Does Psalm 127:2 promote laidback attitude towards hard work?
• Visual assessment of scatterplots acceptable?
• Book about a wormhole found inside the Moon
• Which volcano is more hazardous? Mount Rainier or Mount Hood?

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

What did Rutherford expect in his alpha scattering experiments? [closed]

At the time when Rutherford's gold foil experiment was performed, Thomson's plum pudding model was believed to be true (at least by Rutherford himself and his students).

With this model in mind Rutherford predicted that most of the alpha particles will be deflected by at most a fraction of a degree (sourced by this Wikipedia page ), but why?

In my opinion, since according to the plum pudding model the mass of an atom was assumed to be uniformly distributed and the atomic mass of gold is nearly 50 times larger than the mass of an alpha particle, and gold is solid, therefore much less intermolecular space will be present, so, most of the alpha particles should rebound or get deflected by a large angle.

• experimental-chemistry

• 3 $\begingroup$ Perhaps see this answer to get started: chemistry.stackexchange.com/a/10392/79678 . Search for “Rutherford” here for more information. $\endgroup$ –  Ed V Commented Jul 21, 2020 at 12:36
• 3 $\begingroup$ Strongly related (almost duplicate): chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/106819/… $\endgroup$ –  Nilay Ghosh Commented Jul 21, 2020 at 12:48
• $\begingroup$ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rutherford_scattering $\endgroup$ –  Buck Thorn ♦ Commented Jul 21, 2020 at 13:21
• 1 $\begingroup$ What is the alpha particle bouncing off of? What are the kinematics of that situation? Without using backspin, you don't get backscattering in pool/snooker because the balls are all the same mass. $\endgroup$ –  Jon Custer Commented Jul 21, 2020 at 13:51
• 3 $\begingroup$ Further, given that Thompson's model was proposed after $\alpha$ backscattering was observed, it is clear that the assumption in the first sentence is not valid. $\endgroup$ –  Jon Custer Commented Jul 21, 2020 at 14:35

The nucleus has a radius roughly 10⁴ times smaller than the size of the atom itself (imagine a sports ball in a stadium). That would mean that its volume were 10¹² smaller than the volume of an atom. Sure the gold nucleus is ~30 times as charged and is ~50 times heavier. But dilute that charge and mass by a factor of a trillion, and suddenly those don't seem so significant anymore.

That's the worst thing about those schematic diagrams that you see for the Rutherford experiment. They blow up the size of the nucleus to prove a point, but those diagrams are definitely "Not to Scale™".

• $\begingroup$ I know that but I asked what led Rutherford think that Alpha particle should pass through the gold foil keeping in mind plum pudding model $\endgroup$ –  Tushar Commented Jul 21, 2020 at 13:14
• $\begingroup$ he expectesdthis i.e. before conducting the experiment $\endgroup$ –  Tushar Commented Jul 21, 2020 at 13:15
• $\begingroup$ That's what I'm saying to you. Rutherford is able to divide, so he can already estimate the density of matter and charge within the gold foil, and it's not that dense. $\endgroup$ –  Zhe Commented Jul 21, 2020 at 13:59
• 2 $\begingroup$ Why is a question with 3 upvotes closed? Surely there was a known difference between an alpha particle and gold and this had to be in his mind. Ostensibly one conducts experiments to answer a question, What was the question? The 16in projectile analogy is foolish; shooting a pingpong ball at a pillow filled with pingpong balls and having it bounce back is more appropriate and more exciting. $\endgroup$ –  jimchmst Commented Aug 29, 2023 at 21:00
• $\begingroup$ @jimchmst I would expect that most ping pong ball collisions result in its bouncing back. That seems less than exciting. $\endgroup$ –  Zhe Commented Aug 31, 2023 at 17:52

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged experimental-chemistry atoms or ask your own question .

• Featured on Meta
• Announcing a change to the data-dump process
• Bringing clarity to status tag usage on meta sites

Hot Network Questions

• I'm a little embarrassed by the research of one of my recommenders
• How would you read this time change with the given note equivalence?
• how did the Apollo 11 know its precise gyroscopic position?
• Does death entering into the world through the original sin mean animals were also created eternal?
• Were the common people in Germany ("good germans") morally co-responsible of the war crimes of their government?
• How cheap would rocket fuel have to be to make Mars colonization feasible (according to Musk)?
• How can I play MechWarrior 2?
• Does a party have to wait 1d4 hours to start a Short Rest if no healing is available and an ally is only stabilized?
• Investigate why packages are held back, and stop release upgrade
• Simulate Minecraft Redstone | Where to start?
• How to raise and lower indices as a physicist would handle it?
• What was the first "Star Trek" style teleporter in SF?
• How to connect 20 plus external hard drives to a computer?
• Starting with 2014 "+" signs and 2015 "−" signs, you delete signs until one remains. What’s left?
• Approximations for a Fibonacci-Like Sequence
• How to truncate text in latex?
• Filtering polygons by name in one column of QGIS Attribute Table
• Is there a way to prove ownership of church land?
• How high does the ocean tide rise every 90 minutes due to the gravitational pull of the space station?
• What is the translation of this quote by Plato?
• how do I fix apt-file? - not working and added extra repos
• Colossians 1:16 New World Translation renders τα πάντα as “all other things” but why is this is not shown in their Kingdom Interlinear?
• Are others allowed to use my copyrighted figures in theses, without asking?
• Why does Jeff think that having a story at all seems gross?

Rutherford Scattering ( AQA GCSE Physics )

Revision note.

Physics Project Lead

Rutherford Scattering

Alpha scattering.

• Physicist, Ernest Rutherford was instructing two of his students, Hans Geiger and Ernest Marsden to carry out the experiment
• They were directing a beam of alpha particles (He 2+ ions) at a thin gold foil
• They expected the alpha particles to travel through the gold foil, and maybe change direction a small amount
• Most of the alpha particles passed straight through the foil
• Some of the alpha particles changed direction but continued through the foil
• A few of the alpha particles bounced back off the gold foil
• The bouncing back could not be explained by the Plum Pudding model, so a new model had to be created

When alpha particles are fired at thin gold foil, most of them go straight through, some are deflected and a very small number bounce straight back

The Nuclear Model

• Ernest Rutherford made different conclusions from the findings of the experiment
• The table below describes the findings and conclusions of A, B and C from the image above:

Alpha Scattering Findings and Conclusions Table

• Rutherford proposed the nuclear model of the atom
• Nearly all of the mass of the atom is concentrated in the centre of the atom (in the nucleus)
• The nucleus is positively charged
• Negatively charged electrons orbit the nucleus at a distance
• The nuclear model could explain experimental observations better than the Plum Pudding model

The Nuclear model replaced the Plum Pudding model as it could better explain the observations of Rutherford’s Scattering Experiment

You've read 0 of your 10 free revision notes

Unlock more, it's free, join the 100,000 + students that ❤️ save my exams.

the (exam) results speak for themselves:

Did this page help you?

• Atoms & Isotopes
• Atoms & Nuclear Radiation
• Hazards & Uses of Radioactive Emissions & of Background Radiation
• Nuclear Fission & Fusion
• Forces & their Interactions
• Work Done & Energy Transfer
• Forces & Elasticity
• Moments, Levers & Gears
• Pressure & Pressure Differences in Fluids
• Describing Motion

Author: Ashika

Ashika graduated with a first-class Physics degree from Manchester University and, having worked as a software engineer, focused on Physics education, creating engaging content to help students across all levels. Now an experienced GCSE and A Level Physics and Maths tutor, Ashika helps to grow and improve our Physics resources.

Explain Rutherford's α -ray scattering experiment with a neat diagram.

Rutherford passed beams of alpha particles through a thin gold foil and noted how the alpha particles scattered from the foil. observations of rutherford's alpha ray scattering experiment : 1. most of the α -particles passed straight through the gold foil without any deviation. 2. some of the α -particles were deflected by the foil by some angles. 3. interestingly one out of every 12,000 alpha particles appeared to rebound. conclusion of rutherford's scattering experiment: 1. most of the space inside the atom is empty because most of the α -particles passed through the gold foil without getting deflected. 2. very few particles were deflected from their path, indicating that the positive charge of the atom occupies very little space. 3. a very small fraction of α -particles were deflected by very large angles, indicating that all the positive charge and mass of the gold atom were concentrated in a very small volume within the atom..

Identify the conclusions from Rutherford's alpha ray scattering experiment.

Identify the conclusion(s) from the Rutherford's alpha ray scattering experiment.

Rutherford's Alpha Scattering Experiment

• 1.1 Meaning
• 1.2 About Rutherford's Alpha Scattering Experiment

Key Stage 4

Rutherford's Alpha Scattering Experiment was an experiment that provided evidence which disproved the Plum Pudding Model of the atom and later led to the development of the Nuclear Model of the atom .

About Rutherford's Alpha Scattering Experiment

These observations led to a number of conclusions: