GCSE · Chemistry · Edexcel · Spec 1CH0
Development of the atomic model (Dalton onwards)
Rutherford fired particles at gold, expecting every one to sail straight through. Most did. A few bounced straight back. What does that do to the atom?
Predict, then check
Picture Thomson's plum pudding: a ball of positive charge with negative electrons embedded in it. Now Rutherford's group fires positive alpha particles at very thin gold foil, with a detector tracking where each one ends up.
Using the plum pudding model, what did Rutherford expect to happen to the alpha particles?
Relationship matrix
Tap any cell to reveal it. Tap a column header to read one property down every item.
Each cell hides a short answer and the reason behind it. Predict before you tap.
Chemistry · Atomic structure
Whose idea was it?
Which scientist does each idea belong to?
Still to sort
Dalton (0)
1803
Thomson (0)
1897
Rutherford (0)
Gold foil experiment, 1909
Bohr (0)
1913
Chadwick (0)
1932
WHAT YOU'VE LEARNED
A quick recap of today's lesson.
Five scientists, five models, and one experiment that made everyone rethink the atom.
What you need to know
- Atomic models have changed over time. Dalton (1803) said atoms are tiny, hard, solid spheres that cannot be divided.
- Thomson (1897) found atoms are not solid spheres. They contain smaller, negatively charged particles called electrons.
- His plum pudding model: electrons embedded in a ball of positive charge, stuck in position and not moving around.
Have a goYour mate says Thomson's electrons whizz around the plum pudding like tiny planets. What do you tell them?
In the plum pudding model the electrons are stuck in position and do not move around.
The electrons are embedded in the ball of positive charge, so they stay fixed in place.
- In 1909, Rutherford and his research group fired positive alpha particles at very thin gold foil, with a detector tracking their paths.
- Rutherford expected every alpha particle to go straight through. Most did, a few rebounded straight back, and some were deflected.
Have a goRutherford expected every alpha particle to go straight through. Which results did he not expect?
A few rebounding straight back, and some being deflected at an angle.
Only 'most went straight through' fits his expectation, and even that fell short of 'every one'.
- Those results proved the plum pudding model wrong. Most going straight through means the atom is mostly empty space.
- A few rebounding means a tiny, dense nucleus at the centre. Deflection means that nucleus is positively charged.
- The nuclear model: a small positive nucleus surrounded by a cloud of orbiting electrons, in an atom that is mostly empty space.
- Bohr (1913) adapted it: electrons orbit at fixed distances, in energy levels or shells. His calculations agreed with experiments.
- Rutherford showed the nucleus divides into positive protons. Chadwick (1932) found the neutron: similar mass, but no charge.
Have a goCompare the neutron with the proton: what is the same, and what is different?
Similar mass. The proton is positive; the neutron has no charge.
Chadwick's particle matches the proton for mass, but it carries no charge, unlike the positive proton.
The big picture
The model of the atom was rebuilt several times: Dalton's solid spheres, Thomson's plum pudding, Rutherford's nucleus, Bohr's shells and Chadwick's neutron. Each change followed new evidence, and the gold foil experiment was the turning point.
Key points
Worked example
Problem
Rutherford's nuclear model has negative electrons orbiting a positive nucleus. Explain why scientists were puzzled by this, and say what Bohr did in 1913.
⚠ Watch out
Thinking the atom was worked out once and never changed. Every model was replaced or refined when new evidence appeared. Also watch the mix-up between the two big models: plum pudding electrons are stuck in position, nuclear-model electrons move around the nucleus, and neither model had protons yet.
Memory hook
Ball, Pudding, Nucleus, Shells, Neutron: that is Dalton, Thomson, Rutherford, Bohr, Chadwick, in order. Each name is one step forced by new evidence.
Check yourself
Cover the page. Put the five scientists in order with their dates, say what each one changed, and explain which gold foil result showed there was a tiny, dense nucleus.
Flashcards
(13)What did Dalton suggest about atoms in 1803?
How did Dalton say the atoms of different elements compare?
What did Thomson show in 1897?
What is the plum pudding model?
How was the gold foil experiment set up in 1909?
What did Rutherford expect from the gold foil experiment, and what happened?
Most alpha particles went straight through the gold foil. What does that show?
A few alpha particles rebounded straight back. What does that show?
Some alpha particles were deflected. What does that show?
What does the nuclear model look like?
What did Rutherford show about the nucleus?
What did James Chadwick's work in 1932 provide evidence for?
Why did neither the plum pudding model nor the nuclear model contain protons?
Tap any card to flip it, or use Study as deck to go through them one at a time. In the full lesson these run as a spaced-repetition deck — you rate each card Hard, Good or Easy and the tricky ones keep coming back until they stick.
Learning with Lightbulb is opening soon
You can use this lesson now. Join the waitlist and we'll let you know when the full Lightbulb experience is ready.
Keep me postedMore Edexcel GCSE Chemistry topics
- Acids, alkalis and the pH scale
- Alcohols: methanol to butanol
- Atomic number defines the element
- Balanced chemical equations with state symbols
- Balanced ionic equations
- Biological polymers (DNA, starch, proteins)
- Calculating relative atomic mass from isotopic abundances
- Calculating relative formula mass and percentage by mass
- Carbon monoxide as a toxic gas
- Carboxylic acid -COOH and acidic properties
- Catalysts
- Chemical cells
How this lesson was checked. This Edexcel GCSE Chemistry (specification 1CH0)lesson was published through Lightbulb Learning's human-designed editorial process — the educational standards, accuracy rules and publication checks it must pass were authored and approved by Philip Halpin. It passed subject-specific assessment, automated educational checks and technical publication verification before going live (publication checks completed 9 October 2026). Published pages are monitored, human spot-checking is ongoing across the lesson library, and anything found wrong is corrected or withdrawn. How our lessons are made and checked. Spotted a mistake? Email hello@lightbulblearning.co and we'll review it.