B: ionic bond
C: hydrogen bond
D: is crossed out
Few positive particles aimed at a gold foil seemed to bounce back is the evidence that is responsible for the development of atomic model. Rutherford performed an experiment in which alpha particles are allowed to fire on the gold foil.
Some of the particles bounced back which tell us that there are heavy particles present in the center of an atom.
Most alpha particles pass through the atom which tell us that there is a lot of empty space in an atom.
There is also a slight deflection that occur due to similar charge that tells us the element which is present in the nucleus has positive charge.
The Gold Foil Experiment conducted by Rutherford, Geiger, and Marsden led to the development of the Rutherford Atomic Model. The results of the experiment suggested that atoms contain a densely packed, positively charged nucleus in the center with electrons orbiting around it, and mostly, atoms are composed of empty space.
The key experimental evidence that led to the development of the Rutherford atomic model from the Thomson model was the Gold foil experiment. As described, physicist Ernest Rutherford, along with Geiger and Marsden, pointed a beam of alpha particles at a thin piece of gold foil. They observed that a small fraction of these alpha particles bounced back, suggesting they hit a densely packed, positively charged center in the atom. Most alpha particles passed through the gold foil indicating that atoms are mostly empty space. These observations couldn't be explained by the previous atomic model (Thomson Model) where it was assumed that positive and negative charges were uniformly distributed throughout the atom. Therefore, Rutherford proposed a new model, where the atom consists mostly of empty space, with a densely packed, positively charged nucleus in the center and negatively charged electrons orbiting around it.
#SPJ12
True
Answer:
true
Explanation:
The answer is true.
B. PACs allow their members to support a range of candidates with a single contribution.
C. Candidates receive contributions from so many PACs that the effect of any single PAC is diluted.
D. PACs allow organizations to form a close connection to the legislators they support.
The correct answer is option C, Candidates receive contributions from so many PACs that the effect of any single PAC is diluted.
Reason -
Different parties that contribute to a certain candidate assumes to at least have a recognition to their contribution but since there are several donors (big or small), usually the donors with small amount of donation get neglected and the effect of their contribution is felt diluted. This seems to generate a negative aspiration in the donor.