Mercator — where it appears
Named by 39 essays across 6 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
The shortest route is not straight
The shortest path between two points on a sphere is an arc of a great circle, and on almost every map it is a curve. The straight line on a Mercator chart is a different route entirely, and on some journeys it is twenty-eight per cent longer.
Tissot's indicatrix
A tiny circle on the sphere becomes an ellipse on the map, and the ellipse's two axes are the whole story. Almost every published indicatrix is drawn without them, which discards the content and keeps the decoration.
Cylinders, cones and planes
The standard taxonomy sorts projections by the shape of paper they were notionally rolled from. It is memorable, it is how everyone is taught, and it says almost nothing about the properties anyone actually chooses on.
Every projection minimises something
A projection is the solution to an optimisation problem, and naming the objective explains more than naming the family. Some objectives are exact constraints, some are least-squares fits, and one is a table of numbers a man adjusted until it looked right.
Web Mercator is not conformal
It carries almost every map on the internet, it is named after the projection whose entire purpose is preserving angles, and it does not preserve angles. The machinery here found that without being told to look.
Which projection is best
An incomplete question, and the incompleteness is the answer. Every projection preserves something and destroys something else, so the comparison worth making is between a projection and a purpose, not between two projections.
What a standard parallel buys
A standard parallel is a line where the projection is exact. Choosing one does not reduce the distortion — it decides where the distortion is zero and lets everything grow away from it.
Why Mercator exists
A ship can hold a compass bearing and cannot easily hold a great circle. Mercator is the answer to one question — what must a map do so that a constant bearing is a straight line — and it answers it exactly.
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.
The aspect is a free choice
A projection's distortion pattern is fixed relative to its own axis, and where that axis points is entirely up to the cartographer. Rotating it is the cheapest available improvement and it is the one most often left unmade.
The trade-off is two lines
Conformal means the two principal scales are equal. Equal-area means their product is one. Both at once forces both to one, which is an isometry, which the curvature forbids. That is the entire argument.
Compromise projections
A projection that preserves nothing exactly can distort everything less than one that preserves something exactly. For a general-purpose world map that is the right trade, and it is why the two most widely used ones today have no exact property at all.
The projection that shows true size
There is no such thing, and the phrase hides a real question. Equal-area projections preserve area and destroy shape; nothing preserves size in the sense the phrase implies; and the tools that make the point best are not maps at all.
The gnomonic companion
One projection turns every great circle into a straight line, and it is the only one that does. It shows less than half the sphere, distorts enormously, and was indispensable for three centuries because of that single exact property.
The two ways a map is wrong
Angles and areas fail independently. A projection can be perfect about one and catastrophic about the other, and a single number summarising "how distorted" a map is has already thrown away the distinction that matters.
The Earth is a sphere, and when it is not
Every essay before this one treated the Earth as a ball, and said so. The flattening is one part in three hundred, which is nothing for a distance, everything for a latitude, and exactly enough to make the most-used projection in the world fail the property in its own name.
Transverse Mercator and the series that computes it
The projection most of the world's survey data lives in has no closed form. What every national grid actually computes is a truncated power series in the flattening, and how far it can be trusted is an engineering parameter rather than a property of the projection.
The great-circle vertex
One quantity is constant along a shortest path on a sphere, and it fixes the highest latitude that path will reach before the journey starts. That number is why polar routes exist, and it can be read off the departure bearing without tracing the route at all.
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.
Total curvature and the scale rule
The impossibility has a size. A region covering a fraction of the sphere carries a fixed amount of curvature that any flat map must absorb, and for a circular region the least distortion any conformal projection can achieve is a closed form nobody can beat.
Chebyshev's criterion
The only optimality theorem in the subject. Among all conformal projections of a region, the one with least scale variation is the one whose scale factor is constant on the boundary — a criterion with a proof, a unique answer, and a test the site can run.
UTM and the zone system
Sixty separate maps of the world, each six degrees wide, each with a scale factor of 0.9996 chosen so the projection is wrong everywhere and less wrong at the edges. Every constant in the definition is a measured trade rather than a convention.
Scale distortion is the third failure
A map's stated scale is its scale at one place. Everywhere else it differs, by a factor that no conformal projection can avoid and that neither of the two usual distortion measures reports. It is the failure everybody uses and nobody counts.
Geodetic against geocentric latitude
Two angles, both called latitude, differing by eleven and a half arcminutes at their worst. One is what every coordinate means and the other is what every spherical formula assumes, and the gap between them is twenty-one kilometres on the ground.
Fitting the aspect to the region
Choosing a projection is a choice among a few dozen named things. Choosing its aspect is a choice among a continuum, it costs nothing, it changes none of the projection's own properties, and for a long thin country it is worth a factor of 183.
Distortion over a region
An indicatrix describes a point and every practical question is about a country. Going from one to the other means integrating, integrating means choosing a weighting, and the weighting is the step that turns a measurement into somebody's opinion.
The plate carrée, the projection nobody chooses
Plotting latitude against longitude on ordinary axes is a projection. It preserves nothing, its angular deformation reaches 108° and its areal error eightfold, and it is probably the most widely produced map in the world because it is what happens when nobody decides anything.
Where the worst point is
The largest scale error on a conformal map of a country is always on the frontier, never inside it, whatever the country's shape and whichever conformal projection was chosen. It is a theorem rather than a tendency, and it is the reason Chebyshev's criterion works.
Flying a curve in straight legs
Nobody steers a great circle, because a great circle requires the heading to change continuously. What is actually flown is a handful of constant-heading legs between waypoints on it, and the gap between plan and curve falls as the square of the number of legs.
Choosing for a line, not a region
Every criterion in this subject integrates over an area. A pipeline, a railway or a coastal survey is a curve, and the projection an area criterion picks for it is not the one it should have — measurably, by a factor of five thousand.
Conformal does not mean the angles are right
A conformal projection preserves angles between curves at a point. Draw a triangle on one with a ruler and its angles are wrong by degrees — and the total error is fixed before the projection is chosen, because a plane triangle sums to 180° and the real one does not.
The line drawn straight on the page is a route
Eleven essays draw the route on the map. Nobody has drawn the map's own proposal: the ground curve somebody follows by laying a ruler on the page. It has a name on exactly two projections and is 18.2 per cent long on the one where it is famous.
The ellipses are a sample, drawn at a size somebody chose
Thirteen essays measure with the indicatrix and none audits it as an instrument. A published field has a gauge nobody states and a placement nobody states: on Mercator the standard convention draws twenty-five identical circles while the areal factor runs over a factor of 14.9, and the average a reader takes off any of these fields is between 22 and 64 per cent too high.
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.
A symbol has a size on the page and an area on the ground
A proportional symbol is right as a total wherever it is drawn — a count is a count. Read against the region beneath it, which is how a reader forms a density, it is wrong by exactly the reciprocal of the areal factor: 0.083 at 73° north on Mercator, a factor of twelve, with the correction available as one multiplication that no atlas makes.
A dot map's density is partly the projection's
A dot map carries the right number of dots in every region whichever way it is drawn, so it is honest as a total under both placements. It cannot be honest as a density under both: ground on a uniform field reads 0.099 of its equatorial density at 72° north on Mercator, and scattering inside the polygon on the page moves 64.3 per cent of a cell's dots into its northern half without one of them leaving the cell.
The class breaks were computed on the page
The three rungs below price what a reader does with a finished map. A classifier is software, it runs on the geometry it has, and the geometry it has is projected: a five-class quantile classification of one stated field puts half of the three hundred and eighty-four regions in a different colour on Mercator, and 87.5 per cent of them at nine classes.
The worst point is not on the grid
Every maximum distortion this collection has printed is a maximum over a sample, and a maximum over a sample is a lower bound. On Mercator over a sixty-degree band a twelve-by-twelve grid reports 3.464 where the answer is exactly 4, and the shortfall does not go away with refinement so much as decay at a rate that says where the extreme is hiding.
A mean that does not exist can still be printed
Mercator's area-weighted mean areal factor is artanh(sin Φ)/sin Φ, and it has no limit. A sampler asked for it returns the logarithm of its own sample count plus 1.512 — measured slope 1.001 against ln n — so the number is a property of the person who computed it. The Kavrayskiy number for the same map over the same sphere settles at 0.52124 and is a number.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Scale factorAngular deformationConformalityEqual-areaAreal factorAspectGreat circleEllipsoidRegional distortionStandard parallelAzimuthalBearing