Evolutionary Algorithms include sub-specialties like Genetic Algorithms and Genetic Programming. The Wikipedia article "List of Genetic Algorithm applications" at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genetic_algorithm_applications lists over 75 different applications of such an amazing variety and complexity it's literally mind-boggling. And I never misuse the word "literally."

What might such a tool accomplish if you gave it the amazing, elegant gravity wheel designs of Leonardo da Vinci to work on? If there was one person in human history whose genius and intuition would start him off pointed in the right direction to a working gravity wheel, it would be him.

It seems to me that, as hammers are for nails, as keys are for locks, so Evolutionary Algorithms are for realizing Leonardo's vision of unlimited, free power, harvested from gravity. And wouldn't that be something?

And again (as I noted briefly above) before people start saying, "The laws of physics prohibit such devices," please study up on NASA's peer-reviewed Emdrive experimental results, published in December 2016. 'Everybody knows' that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. But many people, when they say that, silently add, "Period, end of sentence, end of paragraph, and end of discussion."

The Emdrive reactionless thruster

But the peer-reviewed experimental results published by NASA clearly state that when you power up an Emdrive device, it converts microwaves into a small but measurable amount of reactionless thrust. In the face of all the naysayers, NASA's actual real-life experimental results seem to say, along with Galileo, "And yet it moves."

And the evidence that it does continues to mount. To see what I mean, please do a web search on the terms "Emdrive" and "China" to find out what is reportedly happening aboard their Tiangong 2 space station.

So if it turns out that the laws of physics are OK with converting microwaves into reactionless thrust, can we really be certain that we know far too much, far too absolutely, to even attempt an experiment like this? Shouldn't we maybe try it just to be sure? I believe (as Galileo did, by the way) that the only way to know for certain what the laws of physics will or won't permit is via experiments like the one I'm proposing.

NASA's evolved antenna design seems to me to be truly surprising and non-intuitive. Would a human mind would ever be able to come up with such a solution at all?

NASA's Evolved Antenna

And since shape is basically what the da Vinci's gravity wheels are all about, this experiment asks if there isn't some surprising, non-intuitive shape for a gravity wheel, that nobody on earth would ever think of, that might actually work?

Let's breed for it, using Evolutionary Algorithms, and see for ourselves. Let's ask the universe.

You want in? We'd welcome your support.

- David C. Coles