Thank you for your thoughts. I have wondered about that, too. However, Mach’s hypothesis/principle actually has reference to a larger amount of mass–see here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach’s_principle
I’m learning about this. However, the analogy doesn’t fit. If you were an engineer constructing a tilt-a-whirl in an amusement park, you’d use the reference point of the amusment park. You couldn’t construct all the Tilt-a-Whirl or the park, or the Earth, to spin around one of the satellites on the Tilt-A-Whirl (to make an analog of the Earth around the Sun). Nothing would work well, engineering wise–and parallax, and everything else, fits more with heliocentrism than geocentrism.
But I don’t think God would have used heliocentrism to communicate with his people in Genesis, anyway, would he? would any reference to “the earth rotating around the sun” have made sense to them? I call the sun rise a sun rise to my 4 year old. To say it any other way would distract from my message of “it’s time to get up, pray, have breakfast, and go to school!”
My thoughts. Thanks.
PS I’m learning a lot. Denis Lamoureux, in particular, has been helpful. Have a good night.