by Ernst Senkowski

   back to TOC 



The disintegration of reality into
a fabric of threads of causality is an error.



It appears to be expedient to begin with the prefatory indication that the treatment of the complex phenomenology of (I)TC within border sciences has to proceed from known terms - which soon prove to be insufficient. In such situations, the author is obliged to suggest to the reader less current interpretations of new vocables, or of such he is used to, without being able to repeat in each particular case their special meanings. 

According to the experience gained from a great number of lectures and discussions, this difficulty mainly concerns the three terms ‘information’, ‘proof/evidence’, and ‘explain’ or ‘understand’, very often employed unquestioningly ones. ‘Information’ is more precisely defined in (A-2), in the following text it is however used in the ‘fuzzy’ manner which, unfortunately, has found general adoption. This applies similarly to ‘proof/evidence’ and ‘prove/evidence’, to which some reflections are dedicated in (A-7). For the pair ‘explain-understand’ things are a little more difficult. ‘Explain’ basically means ‘to classify something in a larger context’, or ‘to trace back to a recognized cause’, and one has ‘understood’ something when able to comprehend an ‘explanation’. Since in TC anomalies are concerned that contradict the valid scientific theories or paradigms, in which their existence a priori is excluded, the aspired classification must come to naught, unless one tries to derive from the appearances extensions that permit ‘explanations’ within a more comprehensive framework.  

In this attempt it shows that a binding uniform interpretation presently is impossible if new ‘right out of the blue’ dogmas are to be avoided. The given facts demand a representation along several tracks: on the one hand, the author feels bound to the analyzing method working with linear, mono-causal linkages in simple time-bound schemes of cause and effect, on the other hand he cannot by-pass the confusing idea of arational, timeless-holistic correlations in the inconceivably complex world background that shines forth (not only) in the contents of TC. Therefore, the reader and the author unavoidably oscillate between two almost incompatible world-views. ITC virtually is a complex of psychophysical interplay in which ancient humanistic contents appear in new forms.  

So, the reader is asked not to expect the solution of the world’s ultimate enigmas. But, in the sight of wise Chinese LAO TSE’s opinion, he may fearlessly look at the ‘multi-dimensionality’: 

                                The sense one can devise is not the eternal sense.
                                The name one can denominate is not the eternal name.  



‘Beyond’ or ‘outside’ the space-time experienced with wake consciousness exist autonomous appearing transentities (TE) capable of communication. The receiving of transinformation (TI), and the (two-way) transcommunication (TC), are realized primarily within the psyche. They can (secondarily) be externalized, either somatically, or with the intermediary of electronic devices.

      ---- TV ◄----  
TC -----MTC ----- ITC -- ---- TA ◄---- -- TTC
      ---- TX ◄----  


Mediumistic-telepathic transcommunication MTC can be considered to be a general fact in humanity. But it also appears as a subjective, historical fore-stage of a possible, more objective, technical transcommunication TTC of a future time. With this view, the mediumistic-technical or the equipment-supported ‘instrumental transcommunication’ ITC represent an epoch-making transitary stage. It manifests in three forms adapted to human perception: transaudio TA, transtext TX, and transvido TV.

  back to TOP          September 2004

 You are visiting our website:  Wrld       To reach our homepage click here please.