There is no Solid Foundation for the Theory of Gravity as the Fundamental Force in the Heliocentric Model

Mainstream Science postulates that "Gravity" is the fundamental force that holds everything together and drives the motions of celestial bodies in the heliocentric model.

This theory has the following issues:

1. Dark Matter & Dark Energy are introduced to the Universe to Interpret Astronomical Observations

When applied to interpret astronomical observations, cosmological models based on general relativity introduce two components to the universe, dark matter and dark energy, the nature of which is currently an unsolved problem in physics. The many successful, high precision predictions of the standard model of cosmology has led astrophysicists to conclude it and thus general relativity will be the basis for future progress. However, dark matter is not supported by the standard model of particle physics, physical models for dark energy do not match cosmological data, and some cosmological observations are inconsistent. These issues have led to the study of alternative theories of gravity. - Gravity | Wikipedia

WMAP Produces New Results

2. N-Body Problem

In general, for n > 2, the n-body problem is chaotic [cf. n-body problem | Wikipedia], yet in the heliocentric model the solar system has planets orbiting the sun, each in a perfect ellipse.

For n=3, this is the "three-body problem" first stated by Isaac Newton himself. [cf. Three-Body Problem | Wikipedia]

---

Conclusion:

The hypothesis that "Gravity" is the fundamental force that holds everything together and drives the motions of celestial bodies in the heliocentric model is not supported by astronomical observations and it cannot model or simulate the motions of the planets in the solar system. The hypothesis is therefore incorrect and true science and scientists ought to discard it - the three-body problem ought to have been enough for Newton to abandon his Universal Law of Gravitation.