This note introduces the richly structured field equations of ECE2. In general, precession is governed by simultaneous solution of Eqs. (18), (19), (21), (22) and (29) to give the orbit. In the limit defined by Eqs. (33) and (34), simultaneous solution of Eqs. (30), (31) and (33) may be enough to give precession by adjusting the parameters a sub X and a sub Y, defined by Eqs. (27) and (28) in terms of Cartesian components of the tetrad and spin connection vectors. These are of course missing from special relativity (flat Minkowski spacetime with no curvature or torsion) and its Newtonian limit, but exist in ECE2 relativity (spacetime with finite curvature and torsion). In my opinion the discovery of retrograde precession in S2 is very important because it signals the end of EGR. Leading astronomers dealing with S2 have abandoned EGR (see paper posted on this blog from the Bogoliubov laboratory and co workers). This type of general ECE2 theory can be applied to any problem considered by Einstein. This task has been initiated in UFT313 to UFT375 to date. The computer may be able to solve all four field equations (8) to (11) simultaneously for gravitation and also electrodynamics, using Cartesian coordinates, or any coordinates.”
We thought that it would be fun to let you have a lot of rope over Easter, in the hope that you would hang yourself (metaphorically of course). You have not disappointed us, Ron. You have proved yet again, as if further proof were required, that you do not know wtf you are talking about. Either that, or you are an extremely deceptive person. The thing is, Ron, nobody has discovered GR-denying retrograde precession. Don’t you think such a discovery might have triggered a Nobel prize for the discoverer and got the latter mentioned in the muggle-news (news for non-physicists). The fact is that you a) cannot understand what you read in an academic paper or b) lie about it in order further your own ends. Let us see what your ‘evidence’ (the Borka paper) actually says:
[page 61]. Also, our results show that the R^n gravity potential induces the precession of S2 star orbit in opposite direction with respect to General Relativity. It has a similar effect like extended mass distribution which produces a retrograde shift, that results in rosette shaped orbits.
[page 62]. Rubilar and Eckart  showed that the orbital precession can occur due to relativistic effects, resulting in a prograde shift, and due to a possible extended mass distribution, producing a retrograde shift.
All of the other papers on the subject say essentially the same thing. Can you not read and understand slightly technical English? People are indeed watching S2 closely because the possible detection of the rosette-shaped orbits which would indeed signify retrograde precession. You seem to have overlooked the big implied ‘IF’ here. Even if retrograde precession (of a Kepler orbit) occurred, everyone agrees that it would be made up of a small prograde component in accord with General Relativity … plus an outweighing retrograde component due to an extended mass distribution. So, Ron, nobody has ‘quietly abandoned’ EGR, as you claim. So what would you prefer us to believe: that you cannot understand the relevant papers … or that you lie blatantly in order to promote your own crackpot agenda? By the way, folks, the reason for considering R^n gravity is that it is one of the two most popular ways (together with MOdified Newtonian Dynamics [MOND]) of a) removing the need to postulate dark matter and b) explaining the rotational velocities in galaxies. Note the irony here: Ron claims that dark matter does not exist, and yet has introduced his own mystical fluid, which can be viewed as being either a pre-relativity aether or a form of post-relativity dark (unseen) matter. This incorrigible clown is really ‘all over the place’ is he not?