Assertion (A ): According to Rutherford, atomic model, the path of electron is parabolic.
Reason (R ): Rutherford could not explain the stability of atom.

Options

A. Both A and R are true and R is the correct explanation of A
B. Both A and R are true but R is NOT the correct explanation of A
C. A is true but R is false
D. A is false and R is true

Explanation

To analyze the given assertion and reason, we will break down the statements and evaluate their validity.

### Step 1: Understand the Assertion (A)
The assertion states: "According to Rutherford, atomic model, the path of electron is parabolic."

- **Explanation**: Rutherford's model of the atom describes electrons moving in orbits around a positively charged nucleus, similar to planets orbiting the sun. However, it is important to note that the paths of electrons in the Rutherford model are not strictly parabolic; they are more accurately described as circular or elliptical orbits. Therefore, this assertion is **false**.

### Step 2: Understand the Reason (R)
The reason states: "Rutherford could not explain the stability of atom."

- **Explanation**: Rutherford's model indeed faced challenges, particularly in explaining the stability of atoms. According to classical physics, an electron in orbit around a nucleus would continuously radiate energy and spiral into the nucleus, leading to atomic instability. This inability to explain atomic stability is a significant critique of Rutherford's model. Therefore, this reason is **true**.

### Step 3: Conclusion
- Since the assertion is **false** and the reason is **true**, we can conclude that the statement "Assertion (A) is false and Reason (R) is true" holds.

### Final Answer
- Assertion (A) is false, and Reason (R) is true.

---