My problem is simple: Where do I exactly draw the line between what should be made into atomic notes (externalized) and what should be memorized (internalized) or written in some other form (another form of externalization)?
I've heard the following categories:
1. The idea must contribute to an end, which can be anything from writing a whole book to solving a problem to strategizing for your life.
2. The idea must be a generalized conclusion or the gist, not specifics.
3. The first point naturally necessitates the note connecting to other notes.
Applying the first and third don't solve my problem, the second point does, but I don't understand it. How do you decide what idea is the gist? How do I decide what ideas to filter out and what not between everything that contributes to the end in question?
I have 1,200 pages worth of notes (font 12, single space). Compared to that, Niklas Luhmann wrote an average of only 6 atomic notes per day. I just cannot wrap my head around what filters he put down. Everything seems important.
Not to mention, I have a lot and a lot of other types of info that I
- Applying the gist that is an atomic note to specifics.
- Decisions about what to read, what to search, which ones have been most fruitful for the current purpose.
- Purpose, goals, objectives, means, progress, failures, and successes of a "project", which can be any end from writing a whole book to solving a problem to strategizing for your life.
- Trains of thought.
Below is an example. I have the weird headers because they can be easily turned to notes later with a script. Also they are unrefined trains of thought, so don't mind their understandability too much as it is now:
<---∆[20260610012254]∆--->
- Atomic note pat tern only; general pattern that
1) contributes to an end, which can be anything from writing a whole book to solving a problem to strategizing for your life.
2) applies to specifics when you connect the specific with that general thing,
3) connects to other atomics that have the first feature too (but sometimes can be orphan and then connect in the future).
<---∆[20260610012258]∆--->
- However, Ahrens is selling the idea of: what if all the ideas necessary to make any draft is already written in your notes?
<---∆[20260610012302]∆--->
- But then again, the evidence for [[20260610012258]] is the fact that even Niklas Luhmann who was considered a note taking freak for noting down so much only wrote 6 atomic notes per day. That is an immutable fact.
- At the very least, you have to only turn the top five ideas of the day into atomic notes, no more.
<---∆[20260610012521]∆--->
- What I'm concerned about are all the domain-specific info that one comes up with when applying these [[20260610012254]] atomic ideas.
<---∆[202606108012626]∆--->
- Let's count them [[20260610012521]], those types of information that need to be noted down other than atomic notes [[20260610012254]]:
- Applying the atomic notes for domain specific stuff.
- Decisions about what to read, what to search, which ones have been most fruitful for the current purpose.
- Purpose, goals, objectives, means, progress, failures, and successes of a "project", which can be any end from writing a whole book to solving a problem to strategizing for your life.
- This current thought train.
<---∆[20260610012805]∆--->
- What [[20260610012258]] doesn't consider while [[20260610012254]] does is that even a research paper is a one percentile gist of many things one has read, a rate even much less for a book about an original idea.
<---∆[20260610013041]∆--->
- So [[20260610012805]], I hypothesize that the top 5 ideas of the day are not only enough but way too much for writing a clean draft. That's because most of the core atomic notes [[20260610012254]] are used for other drafts.
<---∆[20260610013830]∆--->
- Do they [[202606108012626]] really need to be atomic?
- If not, in what form should they be written, if written at all?
<---∆[20260610013911]∆--->
- [[20260610013830]] ties into the problem of strategy depth that chess bots have a limit for.
- For every problem, there's gotta be a limit to how many possible solutions you will consider and how deep you will consider them.
<---∆[20260610014134]∆--->
- [[20260610013911]] depends on the time available and the importance of the end.
<---∆[20260610014242]∆--->
- But with [[20260610014134]] the question still remains: [[20260610013830]]
<---∆[20260610015450]∆--->
- There are some principles to organize [[202606108012626]], even if we don't know every singe type of info:
- Hierarchical organization.
- Keeping the info close to where it belongs, i.e. its respective end or project note.
<---∆[20260610015951]∆--->
- Another way [[20260610015450]]:
- Developing the thought chain not as atomic notes that need to be smoked but as evolving drafts that update and brach out like a project on a GitHub repository.
<---∆[20260610015959]∆--->
- That [[20260610015951]] way, you don't smoke, instead you constantly bring the most important ideas to the forefront.
- Older ideas aren't lost either and they are understandable in the context provided by the older versions of the draft.
<---∆[20260610020219]∆--->
- [[20260610015951]] seems like an mutually exclusive method when put side by side with [[20260610012258]]: Is it that either you collect the ideas beforehand and stitch them together for an outline, or you constantly develop a draft that gets better and better with updates?
<---∆[20260610020454]∆--->
- [[20260610020219]] seems like a bottom-up vs top-down draft making, the order is respective.
<---∆[20260610020559]∆--->
- You could do both [[20260610020219]] though. Normally you are in bottom-up mode [[20260610020454]]. When you are developing a project, you get into top-down mode but everyday, you atomize the top most influential ideas.
<---∆[20260610022019]∆--->
- [[202606108012626]] all purpose stuff can be an evolving draft.
- Literature record keeping should be done with a unique format.
- Thought trains are compressed to useful drafts.
- What remains is strategy and its depth of consideration. It must not be too deep, as evidenced by chess grandmasters. You ain't no Stockfish.
<---∆[20260610014026]∆--->
- [[20260610013911]] can be done with explore-exploit.
<---∆[20260610014101]∆--->
- [[20260610014026]] might be a good idea for designing AI.