The heliocentric model was generally rejected by the ancient philosophers for three main reasons:
1) If the Earth is rotating about its axis, and orbiting around the Sun, then the Earth must be in motion. However, we cannot ``feel'' this motion. Nor does this motion give rise to any obvious observational consequences. Hence, the Earth must be stationary.
—————————————
2) If the Earth is executing a circular orbit around the Sun then the positions of the stars should be slightly different when the Earth is on opposite sides of the Sun. This effect is known as parallax. Since no stellar parallax is observable (at least, with the naked eye), the Earth must be stationary. In order to appreciate the force of this argument, it is important to realize that ancient astronomers did not suppose the stars to be significantly further away from the Earth than the planets. The celestial sphere was assumed to lie just beyond the orbit of Saturn.
—————————————
3)The geocentric model is far more philosophically attractive than the heliocentric model, since in the former model the Earth occupies a privileged position in the Universe.
A private good is excludable and rival in consumption.
<u>Option: C</u>
<u>Explanation:</u>
Public products are produced for the wellbeing of the people at no expense by the government or by design. Yet private goods are the ones which private firms produce and sell to generate a profit.
If nature or government offers public goods, it is the businessmen or entrepreneurs who create private goods. A good can be excluded if the manufacturer of that good can prevent people who do not pay from buying it. If it can not acquired at the similar time by more than one individual, an item is rival in consumption.
Food, cleaning/bathing, and transportation of goods
