Gall–Peters — where it appears
Named by 3 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
Mercator against Peters
The most-argued question in cartography, conducted almost entirely without anyone measuring anything. Both projections are exactly what they claim, each destroys what the other keeps, and the numbers are computable in either direction.
What a careless copy hides
A photocopier that stretches one axis is a nuisance to remove before a projection can be identified. Removing it costs more than it looks: an affine fit absorbs the entire difference between the cylindrical equal-area projections, so Gall-Peters and Behrmann become the same picture at any size, to sixteen decimal places.
A choropleth is read by area
Every cartography course states the rule — use an equal-area projection for a thematic map — and states it as advice. It is a theorem, and it has a residual: the error a page puts into a reading is exactly the covariance of the value with the areal factor, which is 24.85 per cent for a northern concentration read off Mercator and 0.00 per cent for the same field read off a map that spreads area by 7.7 to one.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Equal-areaMercatorStandard parallelAffine transformationAngular deformationAnisotropyArea weightingAreal distortionAreal factorBiasCartographic controversyChoropleth