# The iam conjecture

**A Scientific Proof that God Exists**

(The proof below is done by contradiction [which is an acceptable method in mathematics]. However, I recognize some math purists will not accept it based on that fact.)

It's not a tautology if we accept Q.E.D. as a fact. If we accept Q.E.D. as a fact, we accept that there is no other way to deterministically explain the explosion of a singularity in 5D (other than the Prime Cause), and we are not in a cyclic universe.

We *do not* have to develop Iam space to prove the conjecture. All we have to do is simply develop a *realistic version* of Feynman's virtual particle scheme -- something like charged anti-photons in 5D.

To state the conjecture formally:

- 0.a. We live in a 5D universe which is somewhat trivial to prove:

*For example, take a ruler -- it's one dimensional. However, if one were to bend it, it would require two dimensions *For another example, take a piece of paper -- it's two dimensional. However if one were to bend it, it would require three dimensions

- 0.b. The Standard Model will soon be proved incorrect due to non-detection of Higgs Particles

*There's two options here: total overhaul or incorrect.. only time will tell but.. *One would assume "incorrect" (based on the incorrect primary assumption that *Elementary particles are probability waves interacting via virtual bosons)

- 0.c. Time is elastic just like space

*We assume this but don't acknowledge it *I've developed temporal relativity theory which is equivalent to *General relativity minus Lense-Thirring (twisting of space)

1. Feynman's QED is accepted fact, based on his virtual particle scheme
2. A singularity cannot explode in any *deterministic* way in 5D (x,y,z,t,C)[Where C represents spacetime curvature at x,y,z,t as described in other documents]
3. Our universe is not cyclic (successive explosions/implosions)
4. We can develop a *realistic* particle scheme in 5D that mimics Feynman's virtual particles [Such as the proposed charged anti-particle scheme recently described elsewhere]

**Conclusion:** If all 4 statements above are correct, then *God must exist as the Prime Cause*.

1 is true, 2 needs proving, 3 appears true, and 4 is trivial.

I'm most certainly *not* a genius but it doesn't take one to accomplish 4. It just takes a certain perspective or amount of insight. If any physicist worth his/her salts pursued a similar path as i have, they most *certainly* would have developed this theory in much less time (3 years vs. 30 years). So again, i'm *not* criticizing physicists or blaming them for *anything*.. The above realization was the simple result of holding to a way of looking at things for long enough (and did not include the conjecture itself!) .. Put another way, I have *always* believed in God, but i * never* believed we could

*God exists!*

**prove**I promised to 'shoot myself in the foot' if i ever wrote Stephen Hawking again (because I wrote to him too many times about these ideas). (I asked him to allow me to use a toy gun in case I was right.) ;) So please don't make me use a *real* gun on my own foot! Write to Hawking for me! It should be *trivial* for him to prove 2 .. Can you imagine that? A guy who continually avoids God *proves He exists*! How ironic! (In all defense of Stephen, he probably believes in God; he just does not want to develop science based on Him.)

sam iam / salvatore gerard micheal, 2011/JAN/20, Maeaeb, Thailand Micheals 18:48, 19 January 2011 (UTC)