This question is asking for a comparison between Dalton's and Greeks' atomic models by means of the evidences supporting such models. Thus, according to the following, one concludes that just Dalton's model is based on an actual law which can be experimentally substantiated whereas the Greeks' model is merely conceptual.
<h3>Atomic models:</h3><h3 />
In chemistry, atomic models have been proposed in order to understand how the atom is structured. For that reason, several models have come up and comprise, Greeks', Rutherford's, Bohr's, Thomson's, Bohr's and Schrodinger's. In such a way, each one describes a specific way the protons, electrons and neutrons are arranged or likely to be found.
However, we will only focus on Dalton's and Greeks' models. The former was based on an assumption describing the atom as a rigid sphere merely composed by randomly-arranged electrons, protons and neutrons, and the evidences were based on the law of conservation of matter, which states that matter cannot be neither created nor destroyed.
Although the Greeks' model was not experimentally substantiated, it was based on the concept of indivisibility, because the word, atom, is referred to an indivisible object, for that reason, they considered this as a concept, more than as a measurable or sizable thing.
Thus, we see just Dalton's model was based on an actual law which can be easily substantiated at the chemistry laboratory whereas the Greeks' model was just based on a concept, for that reason they differ in this aspect but agree in explanation, because none of them were able to describe the atom further.
Learn more about atomic models: brainly.com/question/1596638
