English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

7 answers

Actually there ARE microscopes powerful enough to see atoms.

2007-12-14 15:13:13 · answer #1 · answered by Nature Boy 6 · 1 2

That is a very insightful and philosophical question. I thought the same thing when I started my chemistry class.

The atom, while it cannot be seen with the naked eye or through the most powerful microscopes has become the basis for all chemistry and physics that humans study. The reason it has become such an accepted theory is the number of experiments that have been used to prove the existance of atoms.

Earnest Rutherford's Gold Foil Experiment - in this experiment, Rutherford shot positively charged alpha particles at a suspended sheet of gold foil inside a chamber. The particles were proved to have gone directly through the foil and hit the chamber at various places on the other side. This proved two ideas about the make up of the smallest, indivisible particles then: firstly, they contained enough empty space for a particle to move directly through them, which meant that an atom contained a small inner area, empty space, and a thin outer area; secondly, because of the directions that the positive alpha particles took, it was proven that the inner area of the atom had an overall positive charge.

J.J. Thompson's Cathode Ray Tube Experiment - in this experiment, Thompson used a cathode ray tube - a device that shoots a stream of particles from one end to the other - to prove the existance of electrons. When he held a negative charge near the glass tube, the beam bent away from it. When he held a positive charge near the glass tube, the beam bent towards it. This proved the existance of a negatively charged particle having to do with atoms.

These two experiments, plus many others, and many philosophical and scientific theories before and after it, have helped humans to compile enough information to draw at first a simple, but increasingly complex and seemingly accurate representation of the atom. With the compiled evidence, we can almost be sure that the atom exists and looks like it is depicted. However, we can never be sure, and that is why scientists are ever trying to find more and more evidence pointing towards - or against - our theories about the atom.

Well I hope I was able to help with your little philosophical dilema Bye.

2007-12-14 15:14:31 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Because there are experiments which prove they exist. The Millikan oil drop and Rutherford gold foil experiments are two which helped define atomic structure.

Also, we can predict the outcome of chemical reactions when we know the reactants involved. If our knowledge of atoms was incorrect, our predictions wouldn't be, either.

2007-12-14 15:07:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

The larger ones can be "seen" with the proper wavelenth of energy that can be converted to a picture. I believe this process can be used in crystals.

2007-12-14 15:22:18 · answer #4 · answered by cattbarf 7 · 2 2

so man invented the electron microscope

2007-12-14 15:07:01 · answer #5 · answered by mooo 1 · 1 2

Just as you can be sure there is God.


...


Oh wait, I am not so sure about the latter. :D

2007-12-14 15:03:38 · answer #6 · answered by xiaodao 4 · 0 2

They can be.

2007-12-14 15:05:52 · answer #7 · answered by John 5 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers