The accepted sidereal period of the Moon around the Earth is 27.32 days and the accepted period of the Moon’s rotation is 27.32 days, thus causing the Moon to always present the same face or view toward the Earth. Under your theory the sedereal period and the rotation of the Moon would be one day to maintain the same appearance.
Imagine for a moment a satellite in a circular orbit. The satellite has no rotation. An observer on the satellite looking at the center focus of the orbit would be required to rotate on the satellite at a rate equal to the satellites orbital period in order to always face the focus of the orbit. If the satellite orbited the focus once in 24 hours the observer would be required to make one rotation on the satellite in 24 hours in order to always face the orbit’s focus. This rate of rotation of the observer could be measured.
NASA could put a satellite into the same orbit as that of the Moon…The satellite would have no rotation of it’s own. It would maintain a plane of reference in space that would be gryoscopically controlled. It would not be allowed to maintain it’s plane by reference to the stars because this would transfer your theorical rotation of the universe to the satellite. Mounted on the satellite is an instrument that locks itself onto the Moon and tracks the Moon. As the satellite orbits the Earth it is necessary for the tracking device to rotate on the satellite to track the Moon in the same manner as the observer on the non-rotating satellite had to rotate to face the focus of the orbit. The rate of this rotation would be measured. If it takes one day to rotate 360 degrees then you are correct. The Moon orbits the Earth in 24 hours. If it takes 27.32 days then you are incorrect. The Moon orbits the Earth in one month and a rotating Earth is neccessary to produce the 24 hour period of the Moon. Such instrumentation capable of this experiment already exist because it is used on the M1 tank to lock targets while the body of the tank moves around under the gun turret.
If there is a flaw in my theory of how the period of the Moon’s orbit might be directly measured in this manner, I trust someone will point it out to me. Perhaps hecd2 could comment on my purposed method.
Again, I do not believe the moon rotates on its axis. I think you are on the right path to consider using artificial sateelites to set up a situation where the two views can be contrasted. See Dr. Bennets articls ([size=2]Genesis, Galileo, and the Crisis of Faith**)** on Robert Sungenis’ website (www.catholicintl.com). He has modelled the interaction of sun, moon, and a third object (sun, sattelite).[/size]
[size=2]On the other hand, this is not an issue for your proposed experiment.[/size]
[size=2]Here is what I would predict for your experiment. You are following the moon around the earth and tracking it (say its center). In the Geocentric case, the satellite is really standing stationary in the aether. The aether will rotate around earth’s axis in 24 hours. The satellite will not rotate due to this motion. The universe will also precess, but since the satellite is in the precessing aether, it will still remain staionary and will not rotate. No rotation will be detected. From a ground station (on earth), the satellite will appear to move east ot west every 24 hours. The satellite will appear to have moon like phases corresponding to the lunar sidereal period.[/size]
[size=2]In the heliocentric case, the satellite will follow the moon. Since it is following the moon, it will require no rotation to track it. From a ground station (on earth), the satellite will appear to move east ot west every 24 hours. The sidereal period will appear to be 27.32 days. The satellite will appear to have moon like phases corresponding to the lunar sidereal period.[/size]
[size=2]Again, the situations appear indistinguishable. I did this exercise in my head with both models in mind (writing as I pictured it). If I erred, I am open to correction. Again, see Robert Bennet’s article. I think this line of reasoning is interesting. It depends on how true GR is. If it is the absolute truth, then I doubt we will be able to distinguish. If it contains holes (as I suspect), then there will be experiments (i.e., the Sagnac effect) which may allow distinguishing between the systems (acentic, heliocentric, Geocentric).[/size]