Triaxial ellipsoid — where it appears
Named by 8 essays across 3 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
Curvature that varies from place to place
The impossibility this site is built on was argued on a sphere, where the curvature is one number. On the Earth it varies by 1.35 per cent, on Jupiter by 31, on Vesta by a factor of 2.7 — and on a body with three axes it varies along a parallel, which no formula in latitude can express.
The equator is not a circle either
Eleven rungs price what pretending the Earth is a sphere costs, and every one of them replaces the sphere with a surface of revolution — a body whose equator is a circle. It is not. The two equatorial radii differ by seventy metres, the two surfaces part by thirty-five, and the auxiliary latitudes every ellipsoidal formula is written in stop existing.
A body that is not an ellipsoid
Vesta's three axes are 286.3, 278.6 and 223.2 kilometres, all different, so it has no axis of revolution — and on such a body the planetographic latitude of a point at 45° planetocentric swings by 1.4° as one walks round it in longitude, and by 6.4° on Phobos. Latitude stops being a function of position.
A map of a body with three axes
Every projection on this site is written in a latitude, and a body with three unequal axes has none: the coordinate lines are not perpendicular, Lambert's equal-area formula spreads areas by 28 per cent on Vesta, and the equal-area map that does work has a different one on every meridian.
A conformal map of a body with three axes
This site built an equal-area map of a triaxial body and wrote down what it could not do: the conformal one, which needs an isothermal coordinate that a surface with no axis of revolution was said not to have. It has one, Jacobi found it in 1839 for a different reason, and it takes two one-dimensional integrals.
A conformal map of a body that is not a quadric
Jacobi's ellipsoidal coordinates give a triaxial body a conformal map by two quadratures, and this collection wrote down what that argument uses: the surface has to be a quadric. A real body is not. Solving the discrete Cauchy–Riemann equations instead — one complex equation per triangle, two thousand triangles, conjugate gradients — gives a conformal map of a bumped body to a median of 1.10°, converging at first order in the mesh, with the areal factor spreading by 3.07 and refusing to converge at all.
Cuts of the same size in different places
Where a body is cut decides how well it can be mapped, by a factor of ten — established with five windows of five different sizes, so *where* and *how much* were confounded and the factor could have been entirely about extent. Held to the same surface area to a quarter of a per cent, the answer survives at a factor of 1.32, and what predicts it is the curvature the window encloses.
A ray from the centre hits the surface twice
Eleven rungs map bodies that are lumpy, triaxial and turning at a drifting rate, and every one assumes the surface is star-shaped about the centre — which is what makes a longitude and a latitude a coordinate at all. A contact binary is not: on a stated body with a neck a third of a lobe wide, 10.9 per cent of the sky has no single radius, and the shape model everybody publishes fills the neck in and adds 1.67 per cent of the volume.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Closed formPlanetary datumShape modelFirst fundamental formConformalitySurface normalAuxiliary latitudeCauchy riemannConventionGauss–Bonnet theoremGaussian curvatureIsothermal coordinates