yes
Aristotle's model of the solar system was geocentric, meaning that everything in the solar system revolved around Earth. Ptolemy added in the way the planetary bodies moved, although they still moved geocentrically.
The Bohr model of the atom describes the electrons as orbiting the nucleus in a stable circular path. The quantum mechanical model describes a probability cloud for the electron's position with respect to the nucleus, the shape of the cloud, any special orientations and the spin of the electron.
The potential energy of an electron orbitting in an atom can be approximated by the coulomb potential V(r) = - e2/(4*pi*epsilon0 *r) Where r is the distance of the lectron from the nucleus. This approximation is for atoms with just 1 electron and 1 proton (i.e Hydrogen) For other atoms it is a bit more complicated but this can still be used as a rough approximation. This is from the bohr model of the atom I think
YES
The greatest inaccuracy in Copernicus' model of the solar system was that he still believed that planets moved in perfect circles, when in fact they move in ellipses. This led to inaccuracies in predicting planetary positions.
There are still people orbiting earth
No, Pluto is whole and still orbiting the sun.
Electrons (negative charge) orbit the nucleus (positive charge) like planets round the sun. The source of attraction is electrostatic rather than gravitational, but still inverse-square law.
they are still out there orbiting the sun. they no longer function
Yes, Kepler's laws of planetary motion are still used in modern astronomy to describe the motion of planets and other celestial bodies in our solar system. Kepler's model provides a foundation for understanding orbits and predicting the positions of planets accurately.
We don't know yet. Science is still looking for answers. All we do know is that it isn't necessarily important. Hydrogen's most common isotope contains no neutrons: only 1 proton and 1 orbiting electron.
Dalton didn't really know (or much care) anything about atomic structure; as far as he was concerned, they were basically little indivisible blobs with hooks or something on them that allowed them to attach to each other.The Bohr model pictured atoms as effectively little "solar systems" with the electrons orbiting the nucleus. This is essentially how most people who aren't chemists or physicists still think of atoms, though it's wrong.The electron cloud model pictures electrons as being ... somewhere ... in a sort of "cloud" around the nucleus. Some locations are more likely than others; this is represented by the "cloud" being denser in these regions.You're kind of on your own as far as determining how these "relate" to each other, since I'm not even entirely sure what that's supposed to mean.