'A Thing-In-Itself' - Neumenon VS. Phenomenon

It was the idea of the philosopher Immanuel Kant, a 'Thing-In-Itself, (Ding an Sich)'
He was and still is one of the most rational thinkers of all time. A Thing-In-Itself should not be confused with the terms; 'Thingamajig' or a Thingamabob, an easy mistake to make.

To Kant, a Thing-In-Itself is an object, which we can sense, as it would appear to us, that is, if we didn't have to sense it through the conditions of space and time, like seeing it, hearing it, touching or smelling it. An element of the nominal world (reflections) rather than the phenomenal world, as it appears to the observer, as (heat is a mode of motion), with no distinct line of demarkation between the two, essentially, between reality and how the object appears in reality as seen through the senses.

This dilemma, a 'Thing-In-Itself has tormented mankind since the beginning of time and probably will until the end of time. Some believe there is no such thing as the reality of nominal but Kant argued that the phenomenal world is an expression of power which can only come from the nominal world beyond.

Nominal, phenomenal it's all unknowable knowledge, to me anyway, eh? A thing without conception or perception by the human mind but we know it's there.