So "wrong" do they all: The plum pudding case and other quantum issues.

Usual textbooks describe Thomson's model as a plum pudding with electrons embedded within a spherically distributed positive charge, not getting that it should rather be based on a precise mathematical model. Moreover, the problem of atomic stability is solved with an electron in a Coulomb potential (hydrogen atom), not realising that this is due to the absence of the radiative term in the Hamiltonian. Again, why in the photoelectric effect only energy conservation is used, neglecting the momentum one? Why Geiger-Mardsen experiment is described as a single test, while at least three distinct tests have been made? And why Planck's black-body law is considered a conciliation between Wien's and Rayleigh-Jeans's ones, when the latter is not prior to Planck's formulation? These examples highlight how there is often a lack of critical analysis in matching prior physics knowledge in a coherent way, as well as a widespread illiteracy of the historical development of the Quantum Theory (QT). This project, implemented by the research group of Milan, thus aims to face both problems, retracing the historical formulation of the QT and creating a coherent conceptual framework of the discipline.