Eckard,
Thank you kindly. I've read your M&M notes and agree some of the fundamentals, also Cahill's wrong assumptions, but I have identified a number of additional factors and effects in a paper due out about now in the 2012 Hadronic journal.
The reflection aberration is reasonably simply explained in terms of 'kinetic reverse refraction', where Snell's law is violated, from surface plasmon resonance as a continuous spontaneous localisation from the approach to the medium frame and back, so implementing reflection at c wrt the vacuum NOT the mirror, as always found experimentally but never understood.
An explanation for the small but non zero positive result is also found. In a nutshell; the atmosphere is dragged with the rotating Earth, but the non rotating ECI (ionspheric) frame waves are not quite extinguished by the time they reach the surface of the Earth (this also explains the birefringence found). This is what causes the scintillation of starlight and probe telemetry. In fact it's a little more complex than that, as the Alfven waves in the ionosphere are quite inconsistent so often we find birefringence, or three propagation axis, in the atmosphere. The effects are tiny so have been written off as 'atmospheric' effects in explaining the reasons the IAU had for giving up on the 'aberration constant' in 2000.
Other effects also seemingly ignored in most interferometers are the reflection and refraction time delays. Count the number of 'crossing' on each path and you'll find the paths are asymmetric. Now try to find how they set up the fringes in the first place to ensure they weren't already overlapping by a fringe or three. They could not! I've detected that this was why the Michelson Gale Pearson 1925 experiment contradicted his others and found moving ether. LIGO's are now far more sensitive, don't have the same problem, and don't find the same result.
The ontology I have seems to be the only one that resolves ALL the difficult questions at once. I hope to have a link for the paper shortly. Can we post pdf's here or just links?
Commiserations with you too on being overlooked. it seems anyone criticising an absolute belief in current use of mathematics is, lets say; 'left to one side'. I think it'd be a shame if John Templeton's special ethos is continuously eroded and lost for good to the false god of kudos.
Best wishes. Let me know if there's a place to load files to and I'll do so.
Peter