← All disciplines

Natural sciences

Electromagnetism

A discipline is a lens, not an owner — the same idea can be viewed through many.

15 concepts39 relationships6 relation families7 bridge concepts

Concepts viewed through this lens

These numbers describe the current Thinking OS knowledge slice, not the whole field.

Explore this lens in the graph →

Disciplines it bridges to

Each bridge is built by ideas the two fields share, the thinking patterns that recur across both, and a representative relationship that shows how they connect.

Field shape — representation health

78/100 overall · 15 concepts

The eight dimensions measure Thinking OS coverage of this field, not the quality or importance of the discipline.

  • Structural87 /100
  • Evidence100 /100
  • Foundations94 /100
  • Factual depth23 /100
  • Pedagogical55 /100
  • Cross-disciplinary100 /100
  • Provenance60 /100
  • Taxonomy100 /100

What kind of structure is this field?

Interpreted from the current atlas — how this field is represented, not a judgement of the field.

  • Representation health 78/100 — healthy representation. Strongest: evidence, cross-disciplinary. Thinnest: factual depth.

    structural · Measures the current Thinking OS representation, not the quality or importance of the field.

  • Its 78 representation-health is above the 55 median of 211 similarly-sized disciplines (comparable by concept count).

    structural · Measures the current Thinking OS representation, not the quality or importance of the field.

  • 20% of its concepts have a single connection (mean internal degree 2.5) — a fairly cohesive internal structure.

    structural · Measures the current Thinking OS representation, not the quality or importance of the field.

  • 51% of its relations reach into 23 other disciplines — an outward-facing field in the atlas.

    structural · Measures the current Thinking OS representation, not the quality or importance of the field.

  • 100% of its concepts carry a source, 100% a Tier A/B source; 85% of relations carry claim-level evidence.

    atlas representation · Measures the current Thinking OS representation, not the quality or importance of the field.

How this lens connects

The kinds of relationship that characterise this discipline lens in the current slice.

Cause & effect11
Kind & structure9
Dependency7
Explains & models5
Teaching link5
Analogy & transfer2

Coverage matrix

How these concepts distribute across domains and concept families — real counts, not a score.

SystemsInformationMatterChangePatternsEnergyLifeScaleStructureDecisionNetworksWavesCausalityComputationEarthSpaceOptimizationNumberProbabilitySecurityThresholdsConstraintsNatural sciencesFormal sciencesEngineeringMedicine & healthSocial sciencesHumanitiesProfessionalArtsInterdisciplinary5316

Knowledge timeline

Real, sourced key dates of these concepts.

3 events
500 BCE050010001500c. 600 BCE · Magnetism1831 · Faraday's law of induction1831 · Electromagnetic induction

Ideas that connect this discipline outward

Concepts viewed through this lens that reach disciplines it does not itself carry — concept-level bridges (distinct from the discipline-to-discipline bridges below).

Mental models that recur here

People represented in this atlas

People tagged with this lens who have a recorded contribution. Not exhaustive, and not a ranking.

Explore connections

What this lens reveals
  • 15 concepts are viewed through this lens.
  • 7 of them bridge into other disciplines.
  • Its signature thinking pattern is “Energy transformation” (recurs in 3 concepts).
  • The most common kind of connection here is “Cause & effect”.
  • It is most tightly linked to Physics.

Derived from the current graph structure — observations, not a judgement of the field.