can the theory of the earth evolving around the sun be challenged?

Question

if so, with what argumen?

Answer 1

Yes, it can be challenged. No, it cannot be challenged effectively.

Answer 2

Well, technically, any theory can be challenged (if you want to argue the sky isn't blue, go ahead).

The question is, is there any evidence that would argue that the theory is wrong?

In this case, the answer is no, not really. The preponderance of evidence is that the earth did indeed evolve around the sun. A good example of this can be found by the fact that all of the "current" planets fall within a very tight plane. Had they evolved outside of the sun's local area, the orbits should be much more haphazard.

An example of this can be seen concerning the moons of Jupiter (actually, this works for most of the outer planets, but Jupiter it works espcially well). There are a class of moons that all fall within a certain orbital plane (these include the major moons like Io, Europa, Ganymade, and Callisto). These moons have fairly consistant chemcial compositions, if I recall correctly

However, there is a separate class of moons who have orbital planes over a variety of inclinations, and locations. These have different compositions than the above moons, but they are similiar to that of asteriods and comets. So the current thinking is that they are captured comets and asteroids, and given the variety of inclinations, that would seem very likely

Answer 3

Quick correction to another person's answer:
The earth orbits the sun, and therefore it revolves around the sun. It doesn't revolve around its axis, it rotates on (or "with respect to") its axis.

Anyway...
Sure, the frame of reference talk is great for philosophy, but it does not work in this particular case. We have figured out that the earth does in fact revolve around the sun, as does the rest of the planets in our solar system. Observations, combined with extensive data collection and mathematical application, show that to be the case. So, if someone says, "until someone/ something stands on the sun and records the orbital paths of the planets around said star, we have no solid proof, and therefor, that fact is debatable...", we find that is not true. We don't base this idea on observations. If we tried to look at the sun revolving around the earth, our foundational formulas and equations regarding gravity will completely fall apart, and therefore, break down much of what we know in physics. It would also make things extremely complicated and, if you want to bring philosophy into it, would go against the principle Occam's razor.

Can it be challenged? Of course everyone will say yes. But the challenge will have no scientific basis.

I hope that helps!

Answer 4

Technically the earth doesn't revolve around the sun, it orbits the sun. The earth does however revolve on its axis.

Now that, that's straight the heliocentric model of the solar system is a scientific theory, and as such can be challenged directly or by postulating a different model and experimenting to prove the competing model. Please keep in mind the scientific method deals with hypothesis and theory's nothing is ever called a fact.

Before the heliocentric model was generally accepted by the scientific community, a geocentric (earth centered) model was believed to be correct. When Copernicus first proposed a heliocentric model, later defended by Galileo, they where ridiculed by the public and called heretics by organized religion for challenging the status quo.

Good luck proving this one wrong, there is an overwhelming body of evidence that support the heliocentric model, but look at Galileo he did it.

Answer 5

For starters, the Earth revolves around the sun, as it would be rather impossible to "evolve" around the sun.

Yes, the theory can be challenged. In Physics, there is this wonderful concept called the "frame of reference". In other words, what moves can be changed, dependiong on your perspective.

If the Sun is your frame of reference, the Earth revolves around the Sun. Howver, if you shift the frame of reference to be Earth, then the Sun (and the rest of the universe) reloves around the earth, which the Earth remains completely still.

The same concept can be applied to nearly any pair of physical objects. Which is "moving" and which is "still" all depends on the frame of reference. We all know that, in theory, we are moving when driving a car, yet if you look ourt the window, it appears that you are still and the rest of the world is moving.

"Frame of reference" is a wonderful concept. Nothing like adding (even by accident) a little philosophy into your science!

Answer 6

The earth REVOLVES around the sun. Life EVOLVED while the earth REVOLVED around the sun. 0.o

Not by any credible argument. Anyone who passed highschool math class knows it's impossible to explain the patterns of planets in the sky without recognizing that the earth revolves around the sun.

Answer 7

i can be challenged. for instance, my theory is the the earth is really just a big scoop of pudding. and the sun is made of something similar to a car tire. and the earth isnt moving around the sun, its moving back and forth, crushing into the sun every few seconds.

make sense? neither does any other theory challenging what is fact.

Answer 8

Technically, for all you nit-pickers, the earth DID EVOLVE around the Sun as it REVOLVED around the Sun.

Answer 9

of course. anything can be challenged.
im going to assume you meant "revolve" and not "evolve" although the correct term is orbit i think.
sure, we know that the earth isnt the center of the solar system (yay Galileo) but how can we be certain that the sun is? until someone/ something stands on the sun and records the orbital paths of the planets around said star, we have no solid proof, and therefor, that fact is debatable...

Answer 10

How can it be challanged when astronauts and cosmonauts in spacestations have recorded movement of the earth relative to the sun and other stars. Even the catholic church a few years ago conceded that yes the earth does revolve around the sun.

Answer 11

Sure it can be challenged. But not with anything other than useless, baseless theories. The problem with conspiracy theories is that factual scientific evidence always gets in the way.