Concept

Assertion — where it appears

A statement about a computation that the computation is required to satisfy, checked every time it runs. An assertion that has never rejected anything proves nothing, which is why every gate here ends by feeding its machinery input it must refuse.

Named by 9 essays across 4 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

Every projection in the library, measured against both properties. Maximum angular deformation across the bottom, maximum areal error up the side, both on logarithmic scales and both measured over several hundred sample points rather than taken from the projection's description. Conformal projections lie on the left edge, equal-area ones along the bottom, and the corner where both vanish is empty because a projection there would be an isometry of the sphere onto the plane. All 26 are plotted; the six named here are Mercator, Web Mercator, Gall–Peters, Mollweide, Equirectangular, Stereographic.

Measuring instead of naming

A projection is called conformal because that is its name. Running the definition as a computation over several hundred points takes about twenty lines, catches a projection the whole internet uses, and is almost never done.

distortion · Tissot
Normal gravity, derived from four constants. Gravity on the surface of the level ellipsoid, by Somigliana's closed form, for WGS84. Nothing here is measured: a, f, GM and ω go in and the whole curve comes out, rising 5186 milligal — 0.53 per cent — from equator to pole. The two open marks are the published values of equatorial and polar gravity for WGS84, which the derivation reproduces to ten significant figures rather than borrowing.

The ellipsoid is a level surface

WGS84 publishes two dozen constants and defines four of them. The other twenty are consequences — polar gravity, the potential of the ellipsoid, the coefficient that dominates the Earth's gravity field — and every one comes back here from a, f, GM and ω to the last digit published.

datums · Height
A closed traverse cannot see a scale error. The same closed figure with two different errors in it. On the left every leg is 400 parts per million too long, which is roughly what forgetting the grid scale factor costs — and the figure closes to 2.3e-13 m, which is the last bit of a double rather than a measurement. Scaling every leg of a closed figure by the same factor produces a similar figure and a similar figure is still closed, so the check every specification leans on is blind to it. Every dimension in that figure is wrong: the perimeter is out by 1.17 m. On the right one angle is 20 seconds out — a far smaller disturbance in its own units — and the figure fails to close by 0.062 m. Closure tests the shape and says nothing about the size.

A traverse must close

The check every survey specification leans on cannot see the error this whole field is about. Scale every leg of a closed figure by four hundred parts per million and it closes to the last bit of a double, while every dimension in it is wrong.

practice · Reduction
Two conventions, and neither of them finds the blunder. A blunder of 350 mm added to leg 3 of a closed traverse, producing a misclosure of 350 mm — one part in 8344, which most specifications would accept. Bowditch's rule shares the misclosure out in proportion to leg length; the Transit rule shares it in proportion to each leg's component along the axis being corrected. Both close the figure exactly, so both are valid; they disagree with each other by up to 14 mm; and neither puts more than 104 mm of correction on the leg that is actually wrong. A rule for distributing a misclosure is a convention for producing consistent numbers, and it is not an instrument for finding errors.

The two ways to spread a misclosure

Bowditch's rule and the Transit rule take the same closed figure and the same misclosure and disagree about which legs were wrong. Both close it exactly, neither puts the correction on the leg that actually carries the blunder, and no measurement can settle which is right.

practice · Reduction
Clairaut's theorem, and the term it drops. Clairaut's theorem says the flattening of a rotating body plus the flattening of the gravity on it equals five halves of the ratio of centrifugal to gravitational acceleration at the equator. Measured on WGS84: f = 3.3528e-3, f* = 5.3024e-3, and their sum is 8.65525e-3 against the theorem's 8.62447e-3. The residual is 3.08e-5, which is 2.74 times f² — second order, which is what a first-order theorem is entitled to be wrong by.

The flattening is not a free parameter

An ellipsoid is usually presented as two numbers somebody fitted. One of them is not free — Clairaut's theorem relates the shape of a rotating body to the gravity on it, and the relation holds on WGS84 with a residual of 3.1×10⁻⁵ — which is 2.74 times f², exactly what a first-order theorem is entitled to.

datums · Ellipsoid
How badly two arcs determine the flattening. The reciprocal flattening recovered by inverting two measured degree lengths, at 1.5° and 66.33°, against an error introduced into the equatorial one. The exact pair returns 298.26. Ten metres of error — 90 parts per million of a 110-kilometre arc — returns 301.5, and the relative error in the flattening is 118 times the relative error in the arc. At 1000 metres the inversion returns a negative flattening: an Earth longer through the poles than across the equator, which is the answer the Paris Observatory defended for a generation.

The figure of the Earth was measured

Two expeditions went to Lapland and Peru to measure the length of a degree of latitude, and the whole signal separating a flattened Earth from a round one is a kilometre in a hundred and eleven. Inverting two arcs amplifies their error by 118 — and a kilometre of error returns a lemon-shaped planet.

datums · Ellipsoid
The same ranking, with the right answer removed from the library. A map drawn in Mercator, fitted by every candidate except Mercator. Something still wins: Conformal conic, by a factor of 1.64 over the runner-up, leaving 0.4 per cent of the map's width unexplained. With Mercator in the library the winner's margin is 1.2e+13. The ranking always produces a name; what tells the two situations apart is how far ahead the name is.

When the answer is not in the library

Fitting twenty candidates to a map and ranking the residuals always produces a winner, which makes it a ceremony unless it can also produce a refusal. Held out of its own library, a Mercator map is named as a conformal conic, leaving 0.4 per cent of the map's width unexplained — and the quantity that tells the two situations apart is not the residual but the margin, which is 1.6 when the truth is absent and 10¹³ when it is present.

wrong · Identify
What a 20 mm closure tolerance lets each station hide. A closed traverse of seven stations in plan, each labelled with the angle blunder that would leave the closure inside a 20 millimetre tolerance. An angle error at a station rotates everything downstream of it about that station, so the closing point moves by the distance from the station to the close — and the last station before the close stands 72 metres from it and can hide 57 arcseconds, against 2.1 at the worst-placed station. The check is not insensitive; it is unevenly sensitive, and nothing in the specification says so.

What a closed figure cannot see

A closed traverse imposes exactly two conditions on its observations, so everything else is free — and the freedom is not spread evenly. At a twenty-millimetre tolerance the worst-placed station in a seven-station loop hides an angle blunder of 2.1 arcseconds and the station standing seventy-two metres from the close hides 57, because a rotation about a point near the finish moves the finish hardly at all.

practice · Reduction
Every projection's angular deformation, and the tolerance that judges it. The whole library on one logarithmic axis, with the tolerance drawn as a line. The population is bimodal: the projections that satisfy the condition sit at 2.09e-6 and below, the ones that do not at 3.85e-1 and above, and there is nothing between. The tolerance could be moved anywhere in that gap — a factor of 1.84e+5 — without changing one verdict. Larger marks are projections that claim the property.

The tolerance that decides the verdict

Eight rungs of this ladder hand out verdicts, and every one rests on a tolerance chosen once, in the site's second phase, at sixty times a measured noise floor. Swept, it decides nothing: the population is bimodal, the tolerance sits in a gap 238,000 times wide for conformality and 646 million times wide for equal area, and the verdict with the least room is a passing one whose margin is the arithmetic's rather than the map's.

wrong · Audit

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

VerificationToleranceAuditBearingConventionEllipsoidFlatteningInverse problemMisclosureTraverseWGS84Conformality

All concepts