Cartographic Projection
every map is wrong, and by exactly how much
Concept

Embedding — where it appears

A placement of a set of places on a page so that the separations between them are their true distances. It is what a map of a finite set would be if one existed, and for places on a sphere none does: the distances are not the distances of any set of points in a plane.

Named by 13 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The four places, and every distance between them. London, New York, Tokyo, Sydney on a Mollweide projection, with every great circle between a pair drawn. The six ground distances run from 5,570 km to 16,994 km, and they are the whole of the input to every figure built on them — no coordinate, no projection and no coastline enters any of them. The arcs are drawn only to say which pair each number belongs to; on this page they are curves, and on the ground they are the shortest routes.

Four cities that cannot be drawn to scale

Every impossibility in this field so far has been about a surface. This one is about four numbers: London, New York, Tokyo and Sydney have six distances between them, and no four dots on any sheet of paper have those six separations. The test is a determinant Cayley wrote down in 1841, and it comes out −3.34 × 10²³ where zero is required.

impossibility · Embedding The least error a flat picture can have, against how much sphere it spans. The same configuration of places, shrunk about its own centroid so that every bearing is kept and only the span changes, with the least worst-case relative error of the best flat picture at each size. Both axes are logarithmic. The fitted slope over the rows below ninety degrees is 2.0246: the error falls as the SQUARE of the diameter. That is Gauss's theorem arriving as a number for a finite set — curvature is a second derivative, so its first effect on a distance is quadratic in the separation — and it is why a county fits on a sheet and a hemisphere does not.

How wrong a flat picture has to be

A determinant proves no flat picture of four places is exact and leaves the size of the failure where nobody can read it. Measured directly, the least error falls as the square of how much sphere the places span — fitted exponent 2.0088 — and the same exponent comes back from five different arrangements while the constant in front of it moves by a factor of seventeen.

impossibility · Embedding Every projection against a picture that is not a map. The worst relative distance error over London, New York, Tokyo, Sydney, for each projection in the library and for the best flat arrangement of the same distances. Each azimuthal member is centred on the set's own centroid, which is the fair comparison. The free picture reaches 0.63% and the best projection, Azimuthal equidistant, reaches 8.28% — a ratio of 13.17. The free picture cannot lose, because every projection's own layout was handed to the search as a starting point; what the figure measures is how much the freedom is worth, and it is worth different amounts at different sizes.

The best flat picture is not a map

A set of dots whose separations are as nearly right as separations can be made beats every projection in this collection — by a factor of thirteen on four world cities, and by eight per cent on sixteen. The collapse between those two numbers is not about cartography. It is that a picture of n places has 2n − 3 free numbers and n(n − 1)/2 distances to spend them on.

impossibility · Embedding The share of its distances a flat picture can hold. A picture of n places on a plane has 2n coordinates and is unchanged by two translations and a rotation, so 2n − 3 numbers in it are genuinely free; each distance held exactly is one equation. So at most 2n − 3 of the n(n−1)/2 distances can be right, whatever the places are and however hard the map maker tries. The share falls as 4/n: five of six for four places, thirteen of twenty-eight for eight, and 197 of 4,950 — 4.0% — for a hundred. The dashed curve is 4/n, which the count approaches from below and never crosses.

Five distances of six, and never more

A flat picture of n places has 2n − 3 free numbers and n(n−1)/2 distances, so it can be exactly right about 2n − 3 of them and no more — five of six for four places, twenty-nine of a hundred and twenty for sixteen, and 3.98 per cent for a hundred. The bound is reached by a construction with no fitting in it, and an azimuthal equidistant map spends only n − 1.

impossibility · Embedding The page's curvature is not a free parameter. The same trilateration, carried out on a sphere of stated radius instead of on a plane, with the error of the distances the construction decides rather than holds. At the radius the distances were measured on it is 5.1e-15 — exact, by construction, which is the refusal this figure exists to make. Two per cent either side of it the worst decided distance is already out by around 10%. Below 90 per cent of the Earth's radius the construction cannot be completed at all: two circles that must cross do not, and the page is simply too small to hold the places. The flat sheet is the right-hand limit, at 152%.

The escape is not a dimension

Four places that will not lie in a plane surely lie in a space — and they do not. The double-centred matrix of their great-circle distances has a negative eigenvalue, so no Euclidean space of any dimension holds them, and buying a third dimension improves the picture by nothing whatever, to fifteen decimal places. What does work is a page with curvature, and the curvature is pinned to within two per cent.

impossibility · Embedding Sixteen cities, each left out in turn. The least worst-case distance error any flat picture of these sixteen cities can have is 53.3%; the best projection in the library, Azimuthal equidistant, manages 57.6%. Each bar is that least error with one city left out. Leaving out Sydney brings it to 25.5%; leaving out Cape Town, the next most costly, to 46.7%; and leaving out any of five — New York, Tokyo, Anchorage, Singapore, Los Angeles — changes it not at all. The note on a row counts the pairs holding the picture at its worst that the city belongs to.

The error belongs to a few of the places

The least error of any flat picture of sixteen cities is 53.3 per cent, and it is not spread over the sixteen. Six pairs hold it there and Sydney is in three of them: leave Sydney out and it falls to 25.5, while leaving out any of five other cities changes it not at all. Choosing which places to draw is worth more than any choice of how to draw them.

impossibility · Embedding A radius of 37.7 km makes a flat picture of four cities exact. Each row is one pair of London, New York, Tokyo, Sydney. The bar is the range of distances between two places of radius 37.7 km — the true centre-to-centre distance, plus or minus 75.4 km — and the solid dot is where the best picture for places of that size draws the pair. Every dot is inside its bar, and the pairs at the bars' ends are the ones that fix the radius. The hollow dots are the picture that is best about ratios instead: its worst pair is 103.3 km off, so it would need places of 51.6 km. The best picture of points is not the best picture of places.

A place with a size can be drawn to scale

Points on a sphere have distances no flat picture holds. Places are not points: give every place a radius and the distance between two of them becomes a range, and some flat picture is right about every range once the radius passes a threshold — 38 kilometres for London, New York, Tokyo and Sydney, six metres for five towns in Britain, growing as the cube of the set.

impossibility · Embedding One line cannot point both ways between New York and Tokyo. The great-circle bearing from New York to Tokyo is 333.0°, and from Tokyo back to New York 25.1°. A flat picture draws one straight line between them, whose two directions differ by exactly 180°; the two bearings differ by 180° and another 127.9°. The dashed direction is the best a straight line can do for both ends at once, and it is 63.9° from the truth at each — which is a floor on the bearing error of every flat picture that contains these two cities.

A flat picture has one direction between two places, and the Earth has two

The bearing from New York to Tokyo and the bearing back are not reverses of each other: they miss by 128 degrees. A flat picture draws one line between the two cities, so no picture containing both can have a bearing error below 64 degrees. On any set of places up to about fifty degrees across, the best flat picture sits exactly on that floor — and away from the poles, so does Mercator.

impossibility · Embedding Five bearings of four cities, held exactly. A flat picture of London, New York, Tokyo, Sydney holding five one-way bearings exactly, each drawn as an arrow from the city it is measured at: London to Tokyo, Sydney to London, New York to Tokyo, New York to Sydney, Tokyo to Sydney. Five is the most any flat picture of four places can hold, and of the 192 ways of choosing five pairs and a direction on each, this is one of eight that can be drawn with every arrow pointing forwards; all eight leave London–New York, dashed, unheld. The price is paid by the other seven bearings: the worst, London to New York, is 165.0° from the truth.

Five bearings of twelve, and only eight ways to draw them

A flat picture of four places can hold five of their twelve one-way bearings exactly, the same count as distances, and the five are found by solving equations rather than searching. The equations cannot tell a line from its reverse. Of the 192 ways to choose five, eight can be drawn with every arrow pointing forwards, all eight leave London and New York unheld, and on sixteen cities no choice made at random can be drawn at all.

impossibility · Embedding Two pairs of ten are in every picture that can be drawn. London, New York, Tokyo, Sydney, Cape Town, drawn holding seven of their ten pairs' bearings exactly — the most any flat picture of five places can hold. Of the 15,360 ways of choosing seven pairs and a direction on each, 152 give a picture whose held arrows all point forwards, and London–Tokyo and Sydney–Cape Town, drawn heavy, appear in every one of them. The three pairs this particular choice leaves out are dashed. The price is paid by the rest: the worst, New York to Sydney, is 142.1° from the truth.

The pair that cannot be held is not the one the geometry names

Four world cities have exactly one pair of the six that no drawable picture holds, and the obvious candidate — the pair whose bearing there and bearing back disagree most — is not it. That quantity predicts something else exactly: whether a held pair's arrow has a forced direction. It separates the two groups with a clean gap and nothing in between. And at five places there is no forbidden pair at all, so the four-place case was a statement about how little room five constraints leave rather than about the map.

impossibility · Embedding Six of eighteen, where either kind alone can hold only five. London, New York, Tokyo, Sydney, drawn holding five distances exactly — the thick edges — and one bearing exactly, the arrow from London to New York. Six exact constraints, where five distances is the most any flat picture of four places can hold and five bearings is the most it can hold of those. All six are satisfied to 1.9 × 10⁻¹¹. The sixth is not free room found by luck: a picture is blind to where it sits, how it is turned and how large it is, distances see the last of those three and bearings see the second, and a picture holding both kinds is blind only to where it sits. Tokyo–Sydney, dashed, is the distance left out; the picture is wrong about it by 6.9%.

A mixed picture holds one more, and what it is holding is north

A flat picture of n places can hold 2n − 3 distances exactly, and it can hold 2n − 3 bearings exactly, and it is tempting to read one budget spent twice. It is not one budget. A distance cannot see which way the page is turned and a bearing cannot see how large it is drawn, so a picture constrained by both kinds is blind to one freedom instead of two — and holds 2n − 2. For four cities that is six of the eighteen available where either kind alone can hold five, and nothing whatever can hold seven: nought of 31,824 choices.

impossibility · Embedding A picture of four places, and the one constraint that is about the sheet. The best flat picture of four world cities, with the six distances it could be asked to hold drawn between the dots and the twelve bearings implied by them. Every one of those is a statement about how two places stand to one another, so every one is blind to where the whole picture sits on the paper. The cross is a constraint of a third kind: a stated position for one place — this dot goes here — which is two numbers and is blind to nothing. Adding both of them takes the largest independent set from 6 to 8.

Two numbers about the paper buy nothing about the places

A picture of n places has four freedoms, and a constraint holds only what its own blindness leaves: distances reach 2n − 3, bearings 2n − 3, the two together 2n − 2. Position is reached by neither, because nothing about how places stand to one another says where on the sheet to put them. A stated position does reach it, and two of them take the budget to 2n exactly. What the count conceals is that the extra two buy nothing: a largest picture holds six place constraints with the pins and six without, the same 7,596 of them, holding the same pairs at the same rates. The constraint system is a direct sum, and a pin is a different currency.

impossibility · Embedding Pins at one place move where the picture sits; pins at four reshape it. The best flat picture of four cities, fitted to every distance with a tolerance of 1 per cent, one bearing a pair to 0.01 radians, and pins to the sheet good to 50 km. Each ellipse is the error in a city's position relative to the picture's centre — its shape, which no shift changes — drawn 30 times its size. Solid: the part the distances and bearings put there. Dashed: the part the pins put there. Pinned at London alone, the pins put 0.00 km into the shape and the places 63.0 km. Pinned at all four, the pins put 30.5 km and the places 29.7 km, and the shape as a whole is 42.6 km against 63.0.

A second pin is a measurement of the places

Counted exactly, a picture of places is a direct sum: the distances and bearings spend its shape and two pins spend where it sits on the sheet. Given tolerances, the sum survives in one form and fails in another. Pins at one place put none of their error into the shape at any tolerance, and wherever the pins are, their average takes none of the distances' error. But every place pinned after the first is a statement about the geography, and held exact it makes the shape worse once its error passes about two thirds of the shape's own.

impossibility · Embedding

Named alongside it

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

VerificationConstraintDegrees of freedomDistance matrixBearingPurposeToleranceAzimuthClosed formEstimatorMinimaxRigidity

All concepts