This is well known, but thanks to fullerconsideration.com we have a lot of detail about how LdS population share has been dropping since the advent of the internet.
Physicist, I Bernard Cohen: “There is no planetary observation by which we on Earth can prove that the Earth is moving in an orbit around the sun. Thus all Galileo’s discoveries with the telescope can be accommodated to the system invented by Tycho Brahe just before Galileo began his observations of the heavens. In this Tychonic system, the planets…move in orbits around the sun, while the sun moves in an orbit around the Earth in a year. Furthermore, the daily rotation of the heavens is communicated to the sun and planets, so that the Earth itself neither rotates nor revolves in an orbit.” - 7 I. Bernard Cohen, Birth of a New Physics, revised, 1985, p. 78.
Physicist Albert Einstein: “…to the question whether or not the motion of the Earth in space can be made perceptible in terrestrial experiments. We have already remarked that all attempts of this nature led to a negative result.” - “Relativity – The Special and General Theory,” cited in Stephen Hawking’s, A Stubbornly Persistent Illusion, 2007, p. 169.
Philosopher, Bertrand Russell: “But in the modern theory the question between Copernicus and his predecessors is merely one of convenience; all motion is relative, and there is no difference between the two statements: ‘the earth rotates once a day’ and ‘the heavens revolve about the Earth once a day.’” - Bertrand Russell, The ABC of Relativity, London, revised edition, editor Felix Pirani, 1958, pp. 13-14.
Physicist Paul C. W. Davies Templeton prize winner . “…as we see only redshifts whichever direction we look in the sky, the only way in which this could be consistent with a gravitational explanation is if the Earth is situated at the center of an inhomogeneous Universe.” - “Cosmic Heresy?” Nature, 273:336, 1978.
Edwin Hubble The Observational Approach to Cosmology, 1937, p. 54. "Such a condition would imply that we occupy a unique position in the universe, analogous, in a sense, to the ancient conception of a central earth. The hypothesis cannot be disproved but it is unwelcome and would be accepted only as a last resort in order to save the phenomena. Therefore, we disregard this possibility and consider the alternative, namely, a distribution which thins out with distance….The unwelcome supposition of a favored location must be avoided at all costs.
Physicist, Albert Einstein: “The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either coordinate system could be used with equal justification. The two sentences: ‘the sun is at rest and the Earth moves,’ or ‘the sun moves and the Earth is at rest,’ would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different coordinate systems.” - The Evolution of Physics: From Early Concepts to Relativity and Quanta, Albert Einstein and Leopold Infeld, 1938, 1966, p. 212.
Stephen Hawking: “So which is real, the Ptolemaic or Copernican system? Although it is not uncommon for people to say that Copernicus proved Ptolemy wrong, that is not true….one can use either picture as a model of the universe, for our observations of the heavens can be explained by assuming either the earth or the sun to be at rest.” - The Grand Design, Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, NY, Bantam, 2010, p. 41.
Astronomer, Fred Hoyle: “…we can take either the Earth or the Sun, or any other point for that matter, as the center of the solar system. This is certainly so for the purely kinematical problem of describing the planetary motions. It is also possible to take any point as the center even in dynamics, although recognition of this freedom of choice had to await the present century. - Fred Hoyle,
Ernst Mach: “Obviously it matters little if we think of the Earth as turning about on its axis, or if we view it at rest while the fixed stars revolve around it. Geometrically these are exactly the same case of a relative rotation of the Earth and the fixed stars with respect to one another.” - 2 Ernst Mach, Die Mechanik in Ihrer Entwicklung Historich-Kritisch Dargestellt, Liepzig: Brokhaus, 1883. English title: The Science of Mechanics: A Critical and Historical Account of its Development, translated by T. J. Macormack, La Salle, Open Court Publishing, 1960, 6th edition, p. 201. The seventh edition of Mach’s book was published in 1912.
Physicist Julian B. Barbour: “Thus, even now, three and a half centuries after Galileo’s condemnation by the Inquisition, it is still remarkably difficult to say categorically whether the earth moves, and, if so, in what particular sense.” - Absolute or Relative Motion, Cambridge University Press, 1989, p. 226.
Physicist, Isaac Newton: “In order for the Earth to be at rest in the center of the system of the Sun, Planets, and Comets, there is required both universal gravity and another force in addition that acts on all bodies equally according to the quantity of matter in each of them and is equal and opposite to the accelerative gravity with which the Earth tends to the Sun….Since this force is equal and opposite to its gravity toward the Sun, the Earth can truly remain in equilibrium between these two forces and be at rest. And thus celestial bodies can move around the Earth at rest, as in the Tychonic System.” - Steven Weinberg, To Explain the World: The Discovery of Modern Science, HarperCollins, 2015, pp. 251-252
Physicist, Lawrence Krauss: “But when you look at CMB map, you also see that the structure that is observed, is in fact, in a weird way, correlated with the plane of the earth around the sun. Is this Copernicus coming back to haunt us? That’s crazy. We’re looking out at the whole universe. There’s no way there should be a correlation of structure with our motion of the earth around the sun — the plane of the earth around the sun — the ecliptic. That would say we are truly the center of the universe - “The Energy of Empty Space is not Zero,” The Edge, 2006.
https://www.edge.org/conversation/lawrence_m_krauss-the-energy-of-empty-space-that-isnt-zero
Nicolaus Copernicus: An Essay on his Life and Work, p. 82. Also from the same book: “Today we cannot say that the Copernican theory is “right” and the Ptolemaic theory is “wrong” in any meaningful sense. The two theories are…physically equivalent to one another” (ibid, p. 88).
Malcolm Bowden gives a great explanation here of why we have seasons in a Geocentric Universe.
My understanding is that there is an annual procession to the Universe that follows the pattern of a Euler disk.
The Universe rotates once per day, but the whole axis/plane also turns once per year, like this video of a spinning top demonstrates:
This is a peer-reviewed physics paper that demonstrates how Newtonian Physics accounts for a Geocentric universe, given that the Universe is rotating.
It builds on this paper : "Newton-Machian analysis of Neo-tychonian model of planetary motions" :
Einstein tried to refute Geocentrism with special relativity, but wound up providing a basis for it with General Relativity :