So...........

[IronHead]

One apple seed will produce many apples .

But I understand you point ,well said. Maybe I was wrong about
your anger on all points. If this is the case why do you even search for
free energy dare I label it that .

[RunningBare]

One apple seed will produce many apples .

But I understand you point well said. Maybe I was wrong about
your anger on all points. If this is the case why do you even search for
free energy dare I label it that .

It is ok to use the term "free energy" as long as it is in the right context, energy from nothing is the same as magic, energy say for example from the wind which is loosly free is real.

But there is another kind of wind, a static wind, I know that seems a paradox and I wish I could explain, I believe there is a way to tap into that static wind, but thats not really the point, the point is, that its real world physics.

[IronHead]

You don't have to explain , I agree  there is a way or many to tap the sea of energy.

[RunningBare]

You don't have to explain , I agree  there is a way or many to tap the sea of energy.

This is as much as I can say from this point, what I have in mind is not a sea of energy, but is in fact localised.

[IronHead]

I believe otherwise, but with very dence localizations. Similar to the universe itself where we have very dence matter is some locations. These location would also be hot spots for the energy I speak of. In other areas this energy would be thin for lack of a better word.

I now understand you problem with the labels some give  these types of energy or the
phraseology used . Energy from nothing is in possible . But this is the way that people explain the free energy  and I agree this is the wrong label to use. The energy is already there ,so it is not energy from nothing.

In HHO we some times say HHO production from water  , this is wrong . It is HHO extraction from water , similar in effect