Systems Atlas Project
A map of systems.
The Systems Atlas Project attempts to decompose the systems that shape the world into their smallest parts in both structural and functional terms. Imperfect and unfinished by design as this isn't a static taxonomy but instead dynamic and evolving like all real systems. It is open for inspection, critique and collaboration, with the uncertainty left visible. The next step is a model built on the atlas where changing one part allows you to watch the consequences propagate.
Archived 27 September 2026 31 July – 27 September 2026 Version 0.1
Why it was set aside
Too ambitious, and aimed slightly wrong.
The aim was to divide every system that shapes the world into its smallest defensible parts, starting from nine domains and working down. Two months in, that looked less like a hard problem than one that could not be finished: breaking everything down to its individual parts, at a scale that reaches whole nations, is if not impossible then highly improbable.
The atlas's own open problems pointed the same way. The nine domains had no defined parent, so "collectively exhaustive" had nothing to be exhaustive of. Courts were placed according to the question being asked rather than by what they are. Two domains were defined by what they are for rather than by what they are made of.
The project now starts from the other end: individual real systems, mapped as they operate, compared across places, and changes to them assessed on the evidence. What is below is kept because it is part of how that conclusion was reached, not as a draft of what comes next.
What is kept here
The atlas, the rules it was held to, and where it failed.
Every page the first approach produced is still here, unchanged except for the banner at the top and addresses that now sit under the archive. The old addresses redirect.
While it was live, anyone with an account could propose a change to a node or comment on one, through two forms on this site. Both closed when the approach was archived, and nothing had been published through either, so there is no discussion to keep.
Destination
Two decompositions, and the mapping between them.
Structure and function are separate decompositions, each with its own tree. A third layer maps functional components to the structural parts they involve, and propagation runs across that mapping.
-
In progress
Structure
Divide each domain into parts that do not overlap, at a consistent level of abstraction, with the criteria written down.
-
Not started
Function
A separate decomposition of what systems do, with its own tree. Not derived from the structural one.
-
Not started
Linkage
The mapping between the two: which structural parts each functional component involves. Propagation runs across this.
Current map
Nine domains. Most of them barely started.
Each row shows how far that domain has been divided, and how many of its nodes carry a definition. Depth is not a score: a deeper domain is only more finely divided, and every level still has to survive the same rules.
Defined counts the definition field alone, not the six fields a node is required to carry. It is the loosest measure on the site.
Level divided Level not yet examined