Making astronomy attractive for experimentalists

The original proposal for why planets orbit a central and rotating Sun while moons orbit their rotating parent planet remain quite good as the idea incorporates some type of electromagnetic field between the larger rotating object and the smaller orbiting object -

"The Sun and the Earth rotate on their own axes...The purpose of this
motion is to confer motion on the planets located around them;on the
six primary planets in the case of the Sun,and on the moon in the case
of the Earth.On the other hand the moon does not rotate on the axis of
its own body,as its spots prove " Kepler


It is a neat way to connect intrinsic rotation with orbital motions but, of course, it is never that simple. The images from the Fomalhaut system indicate a top-down approach where the solar system's galactic orbital motion influences the relationship between a central star and an orbiting planet creating a default off-center geometry rather than an elliptical planetary geometry -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fomalh...oma lhaut.jpg

Rather than 'falling around' the Sun, a planet's variable orbital speed is more like deflecting magnets so the closer to the Sun then the greater the deflection and the greater the planet's speed. It may be that at an enormous distance from the Sun then galactic orbital motion has a greater influence thereby creating hybrid orbits like Pluto.

There is no need to act in the same way creationists act in respect to Genesis as many here insist on truly awful notions like more rotations than 24 hour days or a spinning moon (see Kepler's statement above) but people who choose to do so are wasting their time and everyone else's. The internet brought the end of a grey night for astronomy so it is time to embrace what new observations bring to a discipline that has been badly mangled for so long.