The standard explanation of aberration is based on velocity of the observer. Could someone explain in physical detail how the observational realities of aberration work if earth-based observatories were not moving?
First of all may I say that any outsider trying to understand this question would by now have given up.
First of all for those trying to understand what Stellar aberration is: In 1726, james Bradley looking for stellar parallax found in one year every star made a similar size circle in the sky. The only difference in each was the way they are seen relative to the earth. For example straight above they are perfect circles but as one moved down the circles move sideways until at the equator some are straight lines if you follow the logic.
Bradley and the heliocentrists said the circles were only apparent and this was caused by the earth going around the sun in a year.
No, say the geocentrists, it can be caused by the stars turning in circles around the Earth once a year.
Thus the disagreement betwen the two lasted 150 years.
Then in 1887 The Mitchelson & Morley experiment showed there is no orbital movement in the earth. The heliocentric theory was falsified. For 17 years the Copernicans tried to think up something that they could use to bring heliocentrism back to life. Einstein, the 'brain' was used. He proposed his SPECIAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY that tried to undermine the M&M results. He used ABSURD ad hocs. It worked for after Einstein cosmology claimed both H and G theories were POSSIBLE. His Special Relativity stated that there was no physical differences between H and G.
In other words, Physics admitted that aberration could be the earth's yearly orbit or the stars yearly orbit.
But then came a man called Walter van der Kamp. Walter studied these movements and discovered something that few know about.
Stellar aberration presented the only physical observation that included the Earth, sun and stars.
Now according to Einstein and modern physics the heliocentric interpretation for aberration, if reversed, would show a geocentric movement.
So Walter made out his heliocentric chart, moved the earth around fixed sun and stars and found it could show aberration, yes. HOWEVER when one reversed the order, the geocentric observation did not show aberration.
So, you might think, a geocentric aberration was not possible. Well no. If we place the sun at the centre of the stars, and all take the very same yearly movement relative to the Earth, we will find geocentric aberration. It is a modified stellatum of Tycho de Brahe with every star in the heavens anchored to our sun with all doing the same annual turn. So there is your answer Stanley N, geocentric aberration.But this geocentric explanation of stellar Aberration has consequences for Einstein's relativity?
It falsifies it, because if we reverse the geocentric explanation of aberration, it does not have a heliocentric alternative aberration.
So with Einstein's ad hoc attempt to rescue heliocentrism GONE, we are back to the last scientific experiment that shows the Earth is not orbiting the sun, the M&m test.