---
marp: true
theme: default
html: true
---

# What can't the particle model explain?

Year 7 Chemistry · Particle theory

<!-- Speaker note: Students identify what the particle model explains well and what it can't, reason from its assumptions to its limits, and name evidence for it (AC9S7U05, node 5). About 15 minutes (Engage and Explore 5 min · Explain 7 min · Evaluate 2 min · Typical adds 1 min, Wider about 1 min). -->

---

## Today

**We are learning to** the particle model treats matter as tiny particles that move and attract each other. It explains states, diffusion, compressing gases and expansion very well. It can't explain colour, why substances react, or electricity, because it treats particles as plain balls with no parts. Scientists keep a model for what it does well and use other models for the rest.

- I can name something the particle model explains well, and why.
- I can name something it can't explain, and why.
- I can give evidence for the particle model.

<!-- Speaker note: Before class: A short concept tutorial to close the particle theory unit, before Pure substance or mixture? Set the width with `?width=minimum`, `typical` (default) or `wider`. Not a hinge node. The progression asks for reasoning, not a list of limits: "what does the model assume, and what does this phenomenon need that the model doesn't have?" The sentence starter in "In your own words" scaffolds it. Board notes: the diffusion board is the same as in Why can you squash air but not water?; here it stands for a prediction the model gets right. Teacher: In your own words: one 'explains well' and one 'can't explain', each with a reason that starts from the model's assumptions. -->

<style scoped>pre, marp-pre { font-size: 0.5em; line-height: 1.25; } section { font-size: 27px; }</style>

---

## Why it matters

> A street map is perfect for finding a café and useless for knowing how steep the hill is. Scientific models are like that too.

<!-- Speaker note: A short lesson: what the particle model is good at, and where it stops. -->

---

<span style="background:#dbeafe; color:#1a1a1a; border:1.5px solid #3b82f6; padding:6px 18px; border-radius:8px; font-size:1em; font-weight:500;">💬 Discussion</span>

## Engage: predict

**The particle model can't explain why copper is orange. What does that mean?**

- Colour is not real
- Copper isn't made of particles
- The model is wrong and should be thrown away
- The model has limits: it is still useful for what it does explain

<!-- Speaker note: What happens: The model has limits. It treats particles as plain balls with no parts, so it can't explain colour. It still explains states, diffusion and pressure very well, so scientists keep using it, alongside other models for other jobs. Take two or three predictions before anyone runs it. -->

<!-- Speaker note: Teacher: ask the students who chose 'throw it away' what they would use instead for squashing gases. -->

---

<span style="background:#fef3c7; color:#1a1a1a; border:1.5px solid #f59e0b; padding:6px 18px; border-radius:8px; font-size:1em; font-weight:500;">✍️ Activity</span>

## Explore it

{{embed: https://studio.learningwaypoints.com/tutorials/_playground-science/index.html?id=deck%2Fscience%2Fchemistry%2Fmodel-limits%2Fstep-2&code=widget%3A+diffusion%0A}}

[Open this step in the tutorial](https://studio.learningwaypoints.com/tutorials/science/chemistry/model-limits/?full=step-2#step-2)

<!-- Speaker note:  -->

<style scoped>pre, marp-pre { font-size: 0.5em; line-height: 1.25; } section { font-size: 25px; }</style>

---

<span style="background:#dcfce7; color:#1a1a1a; border:1.5px solid #22c55e; padding:6px 18px; border-radius:8px; font-size:1em; font-weight:500;">✅ Check</span>

## What happened?

* The model has limits. It treats particles as plain balls with no parts, so it can't explain colour. It still explains states, diffusion and pressure very well, so scientists keep using it, alongside other models for other jobs.

<!-- Speaker note: Reveal after running. Ask who predicted it, and what made them think so. -->

---

<span style="background:#dcfce7; color:#1a1a1a; border:1.5px solid #22c55e; padding:6px 18px; border-radius:8px; font-size:1em; font-weight:500;">✅ Check</span>

## Can it explain it?

**Can the particle model explain it?**

Groups: Explains it well · Can't explain it

A smell spreading across a room · Air being easy to squash but water not · A metal bar getting longer when heated · Why copper is orange and gold is yellow · Why iron rusts but gold doesn't · Why metals conduct electricity

* Answer: A smell spreading across a room → Explains it well; Air being easy to squash but water not → Explains it well; A metal bar getting longer when heated → Explains it well; Why copper is orange and gold is yellow → Can't explain it; Why iron rusts but gold doesn't → Can't explain it; Why metals conduct electricity → Can't explain it

<!-- Speaker note:  -->

<!-- Speaker note: Teacher: the sort is the success criterion; the reactions question is the reasoning. -->

<style scoped>pre, marp-pre { font-size: 0.5em; line-height: 1.25; } section { font-size: 21px; }</style>

---

<span style="background:#dcfce7; color:#1a1a1a; border:1.5px solid #22c55e; padding:6px 18px; border-radius:8px; font-size:1em; font-weight:500;">✅ Check</span>

## Reactions

**Why can't the particle model explain why some substances react?**

- Because the model only works for gases
- It treats particles as plain balls with no parts, so it says nothing about how they could join or swap
- Because reactions are too fast to see

* Answer: It treats particles as plain balls with no parts, so it says nothing about how they could join or swap

<!-- Speaker note: To explain a phenomenon, a model needs the right parts. Reactions need atoms that can join and rearrange (Year 8), and electricity needs electrons (Year 9). -->

---

<span style="background:#dcfce7; color:#1a1a1a; border:1.5px solid #22c55e; padding:6px 18px; border-radius:8px; font-size:1em; font-weight:500;">✅ Check</span>

## Evidence

**What evidence supports the particle model?**

- We can see particles with our eyes
- Diffusion, gases being compressible, and tiny specks in water jiggling under a microscope
- It explains everything

* Answer: Diffusion, gases being compressible, and tiny specks in water jiggling under a microscope

<!-- Speaker note: The jiggling of tiny grains from pollen in water (Brownian motion) is the particles of water knocking them about: strong evidence, explained by Einstein in 1905. -->

---

<span style="background:#dcfce7; color:#1a1a1a; border:1.5px solid #22c55e; padding:6px 18px; border-radius:8px; font-size:1em; font-weight:500;">✅ Check</span>

## Why it explains smells

**The particle model explains a smell spreading across a room. Which part of the model does the explaining?**

- The smell spreads only because a breeze carries it
- Smell particles get bigger until they fill the room
- Particles are always moving, with space between them, so the smell's particles spread out between the air particles
- Smell particles are lighter than air, so they float up and spread

* Answer: Particles are always moving, with space between them, so the smell's particles spread out between the air particles

<!-- Speaker note: What the model assumes (moving particles with space between them) is exactly what diffusion needs. That is why it explains it well. -->

<style scoped>pre, marp-pre { font-size: 0.5em; line-height: 1.25; } section { font-size: 22px; }</style>

---

<span style="background:#dcfce7; color:#1a1a1a; border:1.5px solid #22c55e; padding:6px 18px; border-radius:8px; font-size:1em; font-weight:500;">✅ Check</span>

## Mix it up

**Looking back at squashing: a syringe of air can be squashed, but a syringe of water cannot. What does the particle model say is different?**

- Air has no mass, so nothing pushes back
- Air particles are smaller than water particles
- Air particles are far apart, with space to move into; water particles are already close together
- Water particles are harder than air particles

* Answer: Air particles are far apart, with space to move into; water particles are already close together

<!-- Speaker note: The spacing explains it. This is the kind of job the particle model does well: explaining how substances behave from the arrangement and motion of their particles. What this step is for: The model is judged by what it explains well. Squashing is a clear case of it working, to set against the cases where it cannot. -->

<style scoped>pre, marp-pre { font-size: 0.5em; line-height: 1.25; } section { font-size: 24px; }</style>

---

<span style="background:#dcfce7; color:#1a1a1a; border:1.5px solid #22c55e; padding:6px 18px; border-radius:8px; font-size:1em; font-weight:500;">✅ Check</span>

## Elaborate: a better model

**In Year 8 the particles get parts: they are made of atoms of different types that can join. What can this new model explain that the plain particle model couldn't?**

- Why substances react and make new substances
- Why smells spread
- Why gases are easy to squash

* Answer: Why substances react and make new substances

<!-- Speaker note: A new model keeps what the old one did well and adds what it couldn't do. Scientists choose the simplest model that does the job. What this step is for: Seeing that the atomic model adds what was missing shows why scientists use several models. -->

---

<span style="background:#dcfce7; color:#1a1a1a; border:1.5px solid #22c55e; padding:6px 18px; border-radius:8px; font-size:1em; font-weight:500;">✅ Check</span>

## Elaborate: how the idea grew

**Ancient Greek thinkers suggested matter is made of tiny particles, but most people didn't accept it for over 2000 years. What changed?**

- It was voted on
- Someone saw a particle
- Evidence: experiments on gases, chemical reactions and Brownian motion that the idea explained and predicted

* Answer: Evidence: experiments on gases, chemical reactions and Brownian motion that the idea explained and predicted

<!-- Speaker note: Models are accepted when they explain and predict evidence better than the alternatives, and changed when new evidence doesn't fit. What this step is for: The long road from an idea to an accepted model shows that evidence, not argument alone, decides. -->

<style scoped>pre, marp-pre { font-size: 0.5em; line-height: 1.25; } section { font-size: 26px; }</style>

---

## Evaluate: look back

Write one sentence: "At first I thought… Now I think… because…"

**Revision summary**

- The particle model says matter is made of tiny particles that move and attract each other.
- It explains states, diffusion, compressing gases and expansion very well, and evidence such as diffusion and Brownian motion supports it.
- It can't explain colour, reactions or electricity, because its particles are plain balls with no parts.
- Every model has a scope and limits. Scientists keep a model for what it does well and use or build other models for the rest.

<style scoped>pre, marp-pre { font-size: 0.5em; line-height: 1.25; } section { font-size: 23px; }</style>

---

<span style="background:#dcfce7; color:#1a1a1a; border:1.5px solid #22c55e; padding:6px 18px; border-radius:8px; font-size:1em; font-weight:500;">✅ Check</span>

## Exit ticket

**Name one thing the particle model explains well and one thing it can't, with a reason for each.**

* For example: explains diffusion (particles move and mix); can't explain colour (particles are plain balls with no parts).

<!-- Speaker note: Students answer on paper or a mini whiteboard before the reveal. Anyone who cannot answer needs the main idea again next lesson. Where this leads: Next: Pure substance or mixture? (AC9S7U06). In Year 8 the particles get parts (atoms), which extends the model. In class: Brownian motion with smoke in a cell or a video; a class list of 'explains well' and 'can't explain' to revisit in Year 8. -->
