.
You fail to take into account GRAVITY.  There is a universal Gravitational constant which has been measured and it pertains to all the planets in
our solar system.  It is the reason we have Order In The Universe -- one of the proofs of God's existence.
.
The earth does NOT have enough gravity to keep the Sun in orbit around the earth.  If it had enough gravity to do that, the Moon would have
come crashing down to the earth many many yeas ago.  
.
You don't even know the most basic thing about Celestial Mechanics.  I know don't tell me -- Celestial Mechanics is EVIL.
Well good luck converting Astronomy professors to Catholicism.
.
I guess when NASA uses Celestial Mechanics to place the satellites in orbit, it is a total HOAX, because NASA is EVIL.
.
BTW, I wrote software in Fortran in 1975 which uses Keplers 3rd law of Celestial Mechanics to compute the positions of all the planets,
so I know something about it.  Heliocentrism works well for this.  Geocentrism fails miserably, for at least one reason: retrograde motion.
.
My good friend Neil Block is the guy who wrote the software that NASA uses today.  He said that the formula for the Moon required
2000 terms (in the Taylor series).  His software was accurate to 1/10 th of a degree.  I guess he was EVIL also.
.
You people are like cavemen.
.
Lastly, IT IS NOT THE PURPOSE OF THE BIBLE TO DEFINE SCIENCE, INCLUDING ASTRONOMY.  
Here is a quote from a traditional Priest who used to say Mass at my parent's house:
.
6.  Is not the Bible statement that the sun stood still in the heavens (Jos.  10, 13) an example of obvious error?
No, we must remember that the Bible was written in every-day language of the time, not in scientific terms.  Even to this day,
for example, we speak of sunset even though the sun is not setting anywhere and we know that the Earth is orbiting around the
Sun and not vice-versa. Link: http://drbo.org/catechism.htm#lesson12
.
I'm really getting tired of all the lies from people who know NOTHING about Astronomy.

Do you by any chance work for NASA?

Maybe you are retired by now, since you wrote software in Fortran back in 1975.

.
NO, sorry.  Now I guess mathematics is EVIL.

Are you quite sure that mathematics can tell us everything we need to know about God's creation? Hasn't mathematics became like a religion to which no one is allowed waver from its dogmas? That seems to be what you are saying. 

.
Yes, mathematics can tell us which Catholic dogmas are right and which are wrong :P :o ;D :-\

Thanks....but that doesn't address what I was getting at.

Mathematics is a tool. While it is a useful tool, you seem to be saying that we cannot question what humans have supposedly discovered about the earth and universe by using math. The discoveries using math are infallible, isn't that what you are saying?

.
Math being infallible, no more than Music being infallible.  Infallibility pertains to Catholic doctrine.
Now you might say that NASA's formulas are in error, but satellites are not crashing down.
And the Sun is definitely NOT going 24,000,000 MPH.  
.
Catholic doctrine cannot say that the earth has no gravity, because that would contradict what
we can measure and feel in the physical world.  Therefore, Catholic doctrine cannot say that Heliocentrism
is false, because that would contradict what we can measure (and have measured with telescopes).

What is termed "gravity" isn't really as well defined and understood as most scientists want us to believe. Therefore to base a view on the of idea of gravity can be flawed. 

.
You fail to take into account GRAVITY.  There is a universal Gravitational constant which has been measured and it pertains to all the planets in
our solar system.  It is the reason we have Order In The Universe -- one of the proofs of God's existence.
.
The earth does NOT have enough gravity to keep the Sun in orbit around the earth.  If it had enough gravity to do that, the Moon would have
come crashing down to the earth many many yeas ago.  

You clearly know nothing about gravity.  Besides the fact that nobody can demonstrate its existence, the simple truth of the matter is that ... even according to Newtonian physics ... the earth does NOT move around the sun.  Rather, the earth moves around the "center of mass" of the entire solar system, and the sun too moves around this center of mass, which is usually but not always located somewhere within the physical body of the sun ... depending on planetary alignment.

In addition, even in that case, you have to pretend that the solar system is a closed system and the sun is stationary.  Neither is the case.  Sun and the entire solar system are also both in motion, in turn rotating around other centers of mass.

At the end of the day, the only stationary point in the universe would be the ENTIRE universe's center of mass.

.
You fail to take into account GRAVITY.  There is a universal Gravitational constant which has been measured and it pertains to all the planets in
our solar system.  It is the reason we have Order In The Universe -- one of the proofs of God's existence.
.
The earth does NOT have enough gravity to keep the Sun in orbit around the earth.  If it had enough gravity to do that, the Moon would have
come crashing down to the earth many many yeas ago.  
.
You don't even know the most basic thing about Celestial Mechanics.  I know don't tell me -- Celestial Mechanics is EVIL.
Well good luck converting Astronomy professors to Catholicism.
.
I guess when NASA uses Celestial Mechanics to place the satellites in orbit, it is a total HOAX, because NASA is EVIL.
.
BTW, I wrote software in Fortran in 1975 which uses Keplers 3rd law of Celestial Mechanics to compute the positions of all the planets,
so I know something about it.  Heliocentrism works well for this.  Geocentrism fails miserably, for at least one reason: retrograde motion.
.
My good friend Neil Block is the guy who wrote the software that NASA uses today.  He said that the formula for the Moon required
2000 terms (in the Taylor series).  His software was accurate to 1/10 th of a degree.  I guess he was EVIL also.
.
You people are like cavemen.
.
Lastly, IT IS NOT THE PURPOSE OF THE BIBLE TO DEFINE SCIENCE, INCLUDING ASTRONOMY.  
Here is a quote from a traditional Priest who used to say Mass at my parent's house:
.
6.  Is not the Bible statement that the sun stood still in the heavens (Jos.  10, 13) an example of obvious error?
No, we must remember that the Bible was written in every-day language of the time, not in scientific terms.  Even to this day,
for example, we speak of sunset even though the sun is not setting anywhere and we know that the Earth is orbiting around the
Sun and not vice-versa. Link: http://drbo.org/catechism.htm#lesson12
.
I'm really getting tired of all the lies from people who know NOTHING about Astronomy.

Really Apollo, your posts are so self contradicting that it is obvious you are homo consensus personified. Your mind is so captivated by the heresy that you demonstrate the magic that Lucifer brought about beginning with Pythagoras.

You write like you are the only one who understands science when in fact you are a captive of the same false 'science.' Above you begin with gravity as though what CAUSES it is known. Obviously you are a Newtonian and believe his THEORY OF GRAVITY is a fact of science. Didn't anyone tell you that even he said ihis theory would account for a geocentric universe? History shows there were/are about five different theories of gravity. Today, and there is evidence for it, Electromagnetism is being considered as the means by which God controls His universe. Remember when God said in Genesis that He created LIGHT before the sun, well we all know what light is, an electromagnetic effect.

Immediately then you jump over to theology, claiming your Newtonian heresy is some sort of proof for God. What about a geocentric universe, wouldn't that be an even better proof for God, óne that the Catholic Church holds to this day in spite of so many denying this truth?
It is you Apollo who doesn't know the basics of celestial mechanics. What in God's name has NASA's sending satellites into orbit got to do with theb order of the universe?

Now Kepler's third law is a description of the universe as God created it, nothing more.

This observation of Kepler’s was without doubt a great one. In essence, he noted that there is, irrespective of their size and distance, a harmony, a relationship, a wedding, between periodicity and distance - or if you like between time and space - in the movements of the celestial spheres. This law is wonderful in a quantitative sense in that it establishes an equivalency between entities raised to different powers.
And might the Christian believer further expect that if such that is now called Kepler’s ‘Third law’ undergirds the whole of nature, then surely, as Kepler himself believed, had the Creator geometrically signed the canvas of His creation He would have done so with a curve that uniquely reflects His triune Essence? That curve is not an ellipse however, but one discovered by Domenico Cassini. It was Kepler however, who, albeit using Tycho’s records, announced this amazing phenomenon.

Now when you know how God created the Earth, sun, moon and planets, it is easy to devise a THEORY that fits the order and to call it a law. If Newton's law predicted the order Kepler found, that would indeed have given his theory credibility. But he didn't, he based his theory on the mathematics already there.

Lastly you say, IT IS NOT THE PURPOSE OF THE BIBLE TO DEFINE SCIENCE, INCLUDING ASTRONOMY. Every word of the Bible is a truth, whether physical descriptions or theological revelations. The order of the universe is not a scientific question for the simple reason it is now within man's ability to know it for certain. It is metaphysical, and therefore well within the purpose of biblical revelation.

Gravity is nothing but a hypothesis.  No one has ever directly measured it.  People merely DESCRIBE the movements of things with math, but the existence of a single force to explain it is nothing but a hypothesis.  In fact, some scientists claim that there is no such thing as gravity, but that it all has to do with electro-magnetism.  Nobody can explain how "mass" by itself can act on other objects at a distance ... because it can't.

. :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

The discoveries using math are infallible, isn't that what you are saying?

No. Discoveries are made with telescopes.  Math is formulated to explain what was measured with telescopes.
Math can be proven to be correct by repeating the experiments and also with mathematical proofs.

(a + b) squared = a squared + 2ab + b squared.

This can be proven by putting numbers in the formula (e.g. a=2 and b=2, a=3 and b=5)
Math is what engineering run on.  Engineering without correct math fails miserably.  That is why we make sure
to use math that has been proved.  
That is how we can predict where Mars will be one year from now.  By using the formulas of Celestial Mechanics.
I hope none of you Geocentrists get a job building bridges in my state.