The irreducible epistemic atoms underlying the curriculum. 4,828 atoms across 8 types and 2 molecules
When a note contains multiple ideas connected by 'and' or 'also,' create separate notes—one per idea—with explicit links between them, rather than allowing compound ideas to remain fused in a single container.
Assign a unique identifier to every note before writing any content, treating the addressing decision as the first step that enables all subsequent linking and referencing.
Apply the 'link test' by checking whether all links from a note feel relevant to the entire note—if some links connect only to parts, the note contains multiple units requiring separation.
Store well-formed questions as first-class atoms in your knowledge system with the same structural treatment (unique identifiers, bidirectional links, metadata) as claims and answers, because questions organize attention and generate persistent search filters.
Create cross-domain links between notes from different topic clusters rather than only within-cluster links, because weak ties that bridge disparate domains generate more surprising insights than strong ties that reinforce existing knowledge clusters.
When a note has accumulated multiple backlinks from different contexts, review those backlinks as a discovery mechanism to identify emergent patterns and connections your original authorship did not anticipate, treating the backlink panel as a serendipity engine.
Combine hierarchical folders (for coarse structure), tags (for cross-cutting themes), explicit links (for semantic relationships), and maps of content (for curated entry points) rather than relying on any single organizational mechanism, as each hierarchy type makes different questions answerable.
When opening a hub note (one you reference frequently), immediately check its backlinks panel and spend two minutes reading the incoming references to surface connections you had forgotten.
When building connections between notes, test each link by asking whether you can articulate the relationship in a complete sentence—if you cannot, delete the link rather than inflating density metrics artificially.
Identify your top 5% of notes by connection count and schedule quarterly reviews where you verify each hub note is current, accurate, and well-linked, investing maintenance effort proportional to structural importance.
Distinguish real hubs (concepts earning centrality through genuine cross-domain relationships) from artificial hubs (index pages linking to everything in a category) by testing whether removing the hub would sever meaningful conceptual pathways or merely convenience pathways.
Identify your three densest knowledge clusters by examining which groups of notes link heavily to each other but sparsely to the rest of the graph, then label each cluster based on observed structure rather than imposed categories.
When a cluster appears only after you force-link unrelated notes to create it, delete those artificial connections because imposed clusters destroy the diagnostic value of emergent structure.
Start building your knowledge graph with your current five nodes rather than waiting for critical mass, because a graph with five nodes and eight edges already delivers more value than five hundred isolated notes.
Deliberately link contradicting ideas in your knowledge graph rather than keeping them in separate domains, because spatial proximity forces the cognitive confrontation that compartmentalization prevents.
Every new permanent note must link to at least one existing note in your system, forcing you to identify relationships at the moment of creation rather than deferring connection to future review.