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

One-parameter family — where it appears

A continuum of projections indexed by a single number or function, of which the named members are a historical sample. The named members are the ones somebody happened to publish, and the continuum between them is where an optimisation over a region actually lands.

Named by 5 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The equal-area conic, from cylinder to plane. The largest distance between the conic at cone constant n and each of its two limits, over a shared grid, with the free scale and offset removed. Both fall as the FIRST power of the distance from their end — the slope on these axes is one — so the conic is never nearly cylindrical: halving n only halves the difference. At n = 0.999999 the conic is the Lambert azimuthal to 1.3e-6, and at n = 0.000001 it is the Lambert cylindrical to 1.2e-6.

The conic is the whole family

Cylindrical and azimuthal are usually presented as two of three families beside the conic. They are the two ends of it. One parameter runs from the cylinder to the plane, and both limits are exact rather than suggestive — which is measurable, and measured here.

families · Families Three surfaces with the same curvature, one of which is a sphere. Every one of these is a surface of revolution whose Gaussian curvature is 1 at every point, built by solving r″ + r = 0 for the meridian rather than by writing a shape down. The spindle closes to a point with an angle deficit, the sphere closes smoothly, and the bulge does not close at all — it ends in two circular edges. A surveyor confined to a patch of any of them, measuring angles and distances, cannot tell which one it is.

Two surfaces with the same curvature

The ladder's base says curvature is the obstruction to a faithful map. It has never asked whether curvature is the whole obstruction — and it is, locally: there is a whole family of surfaces with the unit sphere's curvature at every point, none of them a sphere, and a geodesic circle drawn on one agrees with the same circle on another to one part in 10¹⁴.

impossibility · Curvature The azimuthal family, as one function of one variable. Every azimuthal projection is a rule for how far from the centre to draw a point at angular distance ρ, and nothing else. five named projections are plotted as their radial functions — tan ρ, 2 tan(ρ/2), ρ, 2 sin(ρ/2), sin ρ — and the two dashed curves are the solutions of the two conditions, integrated from the centre with no more than "true scale at the centre" to start from. They land on the stereographic and the Lambert azimuthal to 8e-10. The names are the answers to the equations, not descriptions of viewpoints.

The azimuthal family is one function

Five azimuthal projections are taught as five viewpoints — from the centre, from the far pole, from infinity. They are one projection with five choices of how far out to draw a point at angular distance ρ, and each named property is a differential equation in that one function: f′ = f/sin ρ integrates to the stereographic projection and f f′ = sin ρ to Lambert's, from nothing but true scale at the centre.

families · Families Two members, their average, and the family's best answer to it. Two equal-area conics at cone constants 0.25 and 0.85, the average of the two, and the member of the family nearest that average — at 0.540, which is not the parameter midpoint. The average is not a conic at all: its parallels are still arcs but they are arcs of circles about different centres, so no single cone constant reproduces it and the residual is 0.1722.

A family is not closed under averaging

A family is a set of maps with a parameter running through it, and the compromise projections here are averages of members. An average of two members is not a member: two conics far apart average to something 31 per cent of their own separation outside the family — and averaging within a family makes the map worse every time, while averaging across two makes it 16 per cent better.

families · Families The curve that does the whole job has no kink and does not turn over. The parallel spacing along the central meridian, as a share of the equator's, for the best single smooth curve found and for three maps it is being compared with. Goode's composite is flat to its join at 40.7° and then follows the Mollweide's, and the kink where the two meet is the join every essay before this one has been about. The fitted curve has no kink, and it is not the shape the question expected either: it is flat only through the first fifteen degrees (97.2 per cent at 15°), then closes monotonically and faster than the Mollweide — 54.3 against 77.3 at 60° — and it never turns over.

One curve beats the three maps it would replace

Goode's composite is a sinusoidal, a Mollweide and now a splice strip between them, and the question left open was whether one smooth spacing curve could do the whole job or whether the joins are doing work no single curve can. One term does it: a curve with a single coefficient carries 6.8 degrees less angular deformation than the composite, two beat every named equal-area pseudocylindrical in the library, and the composite turns out to be worse than the Mollweide it is half made of.

families · Families

Named alongside it

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

Equal-areaOptimisationTaxonomyAzimuthalCone constantConicDevelopable surfaceInvariantProjection familyAngular deformationAveragingClosed form

All concepts