If you are going to claim that you take *sidereal* effects into consideration when calculating orbits, at least learn to spell the term correctly. I pointed that out to you before and you look like a fool claiming to consider the effect while misspelling it twice.
Unfortunately for you, *sidereal* time is a consideration for calculating orbits no matter which model you use (heliocentric or geocentric). *Sidereal* time must be invoked because the relative geometric motion between the earth and the sun is the same no matter which model you use. Ernst Mach proved that over 100 years ago. The difference between mean solar time and *sidereal* time has been known for over 2,000 years and is the same in either a heliocentric or a geocentric model. To imply otherwise is either completely dishonest or totally ignorant.
LOL! Indeed I misspelled Sidereal. Stupid mistake. Sigh.
And indeed we need to take that into account. I get paid mucho buckaroos to do what I do. (And I am very good at it)
Sidereal time is directly related to the Earth's rotation referenced to the "fixed" stars.
Mean Solar time is a noon-to-noon average referenced to the Sun.
However, when calculating the position of my birds, I use star sensors. Well guess what bucko; the stars shift as the Earth orbits the Sun. Something called parallax. If the Sun orbited the Earth, I would not have to take that into account. A sidereal day vs. mean solar is a result of our orbit and parallax is a direct result if the Earth orbiting the Sun. Capiche?