A number of you may be familiar with the out of focus videos of stars taken by the Nikon P900. We see a circular light with a fluid like visual affect, in some cases the focus can be manipulated to make the star appear amorphous. These videos are typically disregarded as not focusing the P900.
I too disregarded this phenomenon as a P900 owner but upon further thought, came to realize that when taking a photo of ANYTHING ELSE, anything from a bird, car, indoor lights the list goes on, neither of the two affects mentioned occur.
I've also taken photos of the moon at maximum optical and digital zoom and do not notice such an affect at any point during focusing, neither does the sun with the appropriate solar filter.
Disregarding the precepts of any particular wholesale ideology, would it be safe to conclude that both the moon and the sun are closer to us than the stars are, being in front of this fluid substratum?
I have given a bit more thought to your conclusions.
Yes, you are quite correct, there is a "fluid substratum", but it is between us and all of the "celestial objects". This "fluid substratum" is simply the atmosphere.
I am fairly sure that the difference between the stars and the rest is that their "apparent size" is so small that it less than the resolution of your eye, your camera or even the best telescopes.
The perturbations (air currents and temperature differences) in the atmosphere deflect the rays of light making images of stars "twinkle".
The much larger "apparent sizes" of the planets, moon and sun averages out the variations in "individual rays" so they do not appear to twinkle.
I think the "twinkling" is the cause of the "fluid effect" in the videos. There is a little of the same effect around the edges of the images of some planets.
Really though, I don't think I would read too much into out of focus videos.
Look up "Why stars twinkle".