The collection

Every essay — page 13

Essays 289 to 312 of 437, in the same order.
One map made of two, and the latitude where they meet. Goode's homolosine drawn without its interruptions: sinusoidal between 40°44′11.98″ north and south and Mollweide beyond, joined at the latitude where a parallel has the same length in both. Dashed: the join. Heavy: four meridians, drawn from 60° south to 60° north, which cross it. The central meridian crosses smoothly; the others turn a corner there, reaching 13.30° at 110° of longitude, marked. The map is equal-area everywhere, and every parallel keeps its length across the join. The families

Joined where the parallels agree, and the meridians turn a corner

Goode's homolosine is two projections joined at 40°44′11.98″, and three quantities match there: the length of the parallel, the areal factor, and the spacing of the parallels on the central meridian. The fourth does not. Every meridian but the central one turns a corner at the join, up to 13.30° at 110° of longitude, and the angular deformation drops 26° across a line of no width. Moving the join decides where that corner is paid, not whether.

6 figures · Families
Four lines of position, two unknowns, and four gaps that do not close. Four bodies at azimuths of 20°, 110°, 200°, 290° from the ship, each sight given an independent error of about 2 km along its azimuth. No point lies on all four lines. The least-squares point — the hollow dot — is the one whose squared distances to the four lines are smallest, and the dashed perpendiculars are those distances: 0.31, 2.83, 0.32, 2.83 km. The ship, the solid dot, is 3.21 km away. Three lines would have left a triangle and no residual worth the name; four leave two degrees of freedom, and the four gaps are the first quantity here that can be read as a measurement of the sights themselves. Paths and directions

The residual reports the error the fix was immune to

A fourth sight gives a four-line fit something three lines never had: a leftover. The leftover is a real measurement of the sights, and it is useless exactly where it is needed. One number computed from the four azimuths alone — before any star is observed — says how much of a common error reaches the residual, and it is 1 when the bodies stand at the quarters of the compass, where such an error moves the fix by nothing at all, and 0.004 when they are bunched within sixty degrees, where it moves the fix by two kilometres.

7 figures · Position fix
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 impossibility

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.

7 figures · Embedding
A ring round the pole at 80°, and the two pieces it makes. the boundary of a small polar cap — and of everything else. A closed curve divides a sphere into two pieces and neither of them is the outside: one is 4 thousand square kilometres and the other is 506 thousand, a ratio of 130.6 to one, and the coordinates are the same either way. The two colours are the two pieces, sampled at points rather than shaded, because shading one of them would already be the decision this figure is about. What a machine does with it

A polygon on a sphere has no outside

Seven essays have treated a stored ring as a boundary between inside and outside. A closed curve on a sphere divides it into two pieces and neither of them is the outside, so every polygon in every file depends on a convention that no coordinate carries — and the two conventions in common use disagree by a factor of fourteen on any ring that contains a pole.

7 figures · Dataset
What a seven-parameter fit's residual is made of. A published transformation accuracy is the root-mean-square residual at the common points, and here it is 1.51 metres. Almost all of it — 1.51 — is the network's own distortion, which a rigid motion and a scale cannot follow and which is present at every point of the country whether it was used in the fit or not. The transformation's own error, measured as the disagreement between the fitted parameters and the true ones over a clean grid, is 0.091 metres: 6 per cent of the quoted figure. The last bar is the control — the same fit with the distortion switched off, at 2.9e-4 metres. What the numbers refer to

What another common point buys

A seven-parameter datum fit leaves a pattern rather than noise. Six per cent of the residual it reports is the transformation's own error and the other ninety-four is distortion no seven parameters can follow — so adding common points improves a term that was already small and cannot touch the one that is quoted.

8 figures · Datum
A coast that agrees with its graticule, except where it was copied. The outline of Japan on a map whose graticule is a conformal conic projection. 30 per cent of the coast, drawn in the second ink, was copied from a sinusoidal sheet of the same ground and fitted into place so that its two ends meet the coast either side, the dots. The dashed line is the coast the graticule predicts. Everywhere else the drawn coast lies on it exactly; along the copied stretch it departs by up to 9.4 thousandths of the map's width. Nothing in the graticule shows it. What is taught wrongly

A compiled map agrees with its graticule except where it was copied

A map compiled from two sheets has no single projection behind it, and its graticule cannot say so. Its coast can — not as a residual, which is a number the size of a projection error, but as a profile: the drawn coast lies exactly on the one its graticule predicts, then departs from a seam, and returns at another. The seams are found to within one point in 720, and the stretch between them names the projection it was copied from with a margin of 3.6 × 10¹¹.

6 figures · Identify
Where the summits are, and where the water divides. A stated range 100 km across and 80 km long, its summits 3,000 m high and about 35 km from the western edge, with a plateau falling gently to the eastern edge. Over 40 km of the range the plateau carries a broad rise up to 18 km east of the summits, and a gorge cuts through the range in the middle of that stretch. The dashed line runs through the highest summits; the solid line is the watershed, computed from the land. Lightly shaded ground drains west. Where they part, the darker ground lies east of the summits and drains west: 331 km², reaching 18.1 km from the summits. The terrain is stated, not surveyed. Grids, and what a survey does

The highest summits stay where they are, and the watershed does not

A treaty that puts a boundary on the highest crests which divide the waters names one line where the water divides on the summits and two where a river has cut back through the range. On a stated range the two part by up to eighteen kilometres. They also differ in kind: an error of ten metres in every height moves the summits three metres and the watershed on the plateau more than a kilometre.

7 figures · Boundary
Two defensible answers from the same four sights, and they are kilometres apart. Four bodies within sixty degrees of one another at azimuths of 60°, 80°, 100°, 120°, each sight carrying an independent error of about 2 km and the same common error of 3 km. The four lines are nearly parallel, so a step towards every body at once is almost exactly a step to the south. The two-unknown least-squares point takes that step and lands 3.66 km from the ship; the three-unknown fit, which solves for the common error as well, refuses it and lands 2.22 km away — its estimate of the common error being 1.87 km. Neither is wrong. They are the two ends of one exchange. Paths and directions

What the extra unknown costs where nothing can see it

Four lines of position can estimate a common error in every sight as well as the position. The estimate is honest — three kilometres put in comes back as 2.8 — and where the residual is blind, its scatter is plus or minus thirty-one, and the fix that carries it is scattered fourteen kilometres from the ship against the biased fix's two and a half. Letting the residual choose between the two is worse than either, because a test with no power is a one-in-twenty lottery on the worse answer.

7 figures · Position fix
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%. The impossibility

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.

7 figures · Embedding
The same composite with a strip spliced in, and the meridians no longer turn a corner. Goode's composite redrawn with an equal-area strip of 8° of latitude spliced between the sinusoidal and the Mollweide cap, shaded. The strip's parallel half-length is the unique cubic matching the sinusoidal's value and slope at 36.74° and the Mollweide's at 44.74°, so every meridian arrives and leaves along one direction and the 11.2° corner the plain join turns at 60° of longitude is gone. Nothing else about the map is changed: the cap is the unmodified Mollweide, and the composite is equal-area throughout. The families

An equal-area strip removes the corner and charges nothing for it

Goode's seam matches three quantities and breaks the fourth: every meridian but the central one turns a corner there. A third map spliced between the two removes it — four conditions on one function, satisfied uniquely by a cubic — and the expected price does not arrive. The spliced composite carries less angular deformation across the seam than the plain join, not more: 34.7° against 37.7° at sixty degrees of longitude. What it does leave is the same defect one derivative up, a jump in curvature falling as the reciprocal of the strip's width.

7 figures · Families
Three criteria, three maps, and the tolerance band each one encloses. A spherical square of 25° circumradius under three conformal maps, with the two contours at ±0.5% of true scale drawn heavy and the region between them the area each map keeps inside that tolerance. Chebyshev's map holds 37.0 per cent of the area there, the mean-square map 45.4, and the map fitted to the tolerance itself 64.1. The faint lines are further multiples of the tolerance, and they say where each map spends what it is not counting: the third map's outermost contours are much further out than the other two's. What each projection optimises

The map that keeps the most ground inside a tolerance

A surveyor does not want the smallest worst case or the smallest mean square. They want as much of the territory as possible within a stated tolerance of true scale and are indifferent to how far outside the rest goes. That is a third criterion, it is answered by a third map, and on a 25° square at half a per cent it keeps 64.1 per cent of the area where the mean-square map keeps 45.4 and Chebyshev's 37.0 — bought by sending a tail out to 5.6 per cent where Chebyshev's worst is 1.5.

8 figures · Condition
What simplifying a boundary does to the number stored beside it. One region, simplified at five tolerances, with the error in the two quantities a consumer computes from the pair. If the density was stored, the total it implies moves by exactly the area's error — -1.55 per cent at the loosest tolerance. If the total was stored, the density it implies moves the other way by the same amount. Nothing in the file says which of the two was measured and which is being derived, and the simplification is normally done by a tool that never opens the attribute table. What a machine does with it

The attribute is a claim about the geometry

Fourteen essays price what a stored coordinate means and not one asks what the number stored beside it means. A rate is a quantity divided by an area, the area belongs to the geometry, and no format records which area — so a simplification that moves the outline by nothing visible moves the implied total by 1.55 per cent, an unweighted average of densities is 4.09 per cent out, and a choropleth gives a polar square kilometre fifteen times the ink of an equatorial one.

6 figures · Dataset
Two source geometries of 96 cells each, rebinned to the same three targets. Both curves start from a source of 96 cells and rebin to targets of 32, 128, 512 cells, so the count ratio is identical along them and the only difference is the shape of the source cells: gnomonic squares on a cube against rectangles in longitude and latitude. The ratio dominates — both curves fall by more than half across the range — and the shapes still separate by 25 points at the middle target. The cube loses less, because its cells are all much the same size and the lon/lat source's collapse towards the poles. What a machine does with it

The same number of cells, in two shapes

Moving a field between two cell schemes loses 18 per cent of it per cell in one geometry and 39 in another, and the earlier measurement could not say whether that was the shape of the cells or the ratio of their sizes, because changing the schemes changed both. Holding the counts settles it: the count ratio decides most of the loss, and the shape is still worth a quarter of the field.

6 figures · Cells
An error in a rotation rate is a longitude error that never stops growing. Where the prime meridian of each body has got to, if its published rotation rate is wrong by one unit in its last published decimal. Every line is straight through the origin, because the error is the rate error multiplied by the elapsed time and nothing else — there is no date after which it settles. Jupiter reaches 2279 metres at the equator after a century; Mars, whose rate is published to twelve decimals rather than seven, reaches 0.0011 metres over the same interval. What the numbers refer to

A longitude that drifts with the rotation rate

Ten essays here map bodies whose shape is the problem. A longitude is not about shape: it is a landmark plus an extrapolation over however many days have passed, and an error in the last published decimal of a rotation rate is a coordinate error that grows without bound in time.

7 figures · Bodies
A bank that dries at one tide adds a bulge to the territorial sea. A stated coast 116 km long with five bays 5 km deep, and its twelve-nautical-mile limit measured from the low-water line at two tidal datums 1 m apart. A bank 10 km offshore has its crest 0.5 m below the higher datum, so it is under water at that datum and dries at the lower one, over a disc 1.0 km in radius. Dried and inside twelve miles of the coast, its low-water line becomes part of the baseline, and the limit bulges round it: 339 km² of sea. Everywhere else the two limits are drawn on top of one another, 11.1 km² apart over the whole coast. The coast is stated, not surveyed. Grids, and what a survey does

The sea is measured from a tide, and the headlands decide how much

A territorial sea is measured from the low-water line, and the low-water line is where a chart's tidal datum meets the shore — so a datum a metre lower moves it twenty metres at a headland and a kilometre across a tidal flat. On a stated coast the twelve-mile limit barely notices the flats: fifty-six square kilometres of shore are uncovered and eleven of sea are gained. A bank that dries at the lower datum adds three hundred and thirty-nine in one step.

7 figures · Boundary
Three budgets for one meridian distance, seven orders of magnitude apart. Every quantity that can make a computed distance from the equator to the pole wrong, on a scale of powers of ten. The series in the third flattening, at its worst anywhere on the meridian, is out by 76 nm at four sine terms, 31 µm at three and 22.0 mm at two. The two conventions WGS84 and GRS80 put the pole 82 µm apart. The ellipsoid that best fits the Earth is known only to 15.7 cm from its axis and 563 µm from its flattening, and WGS84 puts the pole 67.2 cm away from it. What is taught wrongly

An ellipsoid computed to a nanometre is known to a decimetre

The meridian series is exact to seventy-six nanometres on WGS84, and WGS84 is exact by definition: its axis and flattening are conventions with no uncertainty at all. The ellipsoid that actually fits the Earth is a measurement, known to sixteen centimetres from equator to pole, and WGS84 puts the pole sixty-seven centimetres away from it. From its second term, the series is more accurate than anything it is used to compute.

6 figures · Ellipsoid
The triangle and the ellipse are two pictures of the same three sights. Three bodies at azimuths of 20°, 140°, 250° with independent errors of 2 km, drawn twice: as the cocked hat their lines bound, dashed, and as the 95 per cent confidence ellipse of the least-squares point, outlined. The ellipse is 4.25 by 3.78 km and covers 50.5 km²; the average hat from the same sights covers 7.06. The triangle is seven times the smaller and holds the ship a quarter of the time; the ellipse holds it 95 per cent of the time, which is what it was constructed to do. The hat is a picture of how much the sights disagree, and the ellipse is a picture of where the ship is. Paths and directions

A confidence ellipse is honest only where the sheet keeps angles

The cocked hat covers seven square kilometres and holds the ship a quarter of the time; the confidence ellipse from the same three sights covers fifty and holds it ninety-five per cent, which is what it was built to do. On a plotting sheet whose longitude is not corrected for latitude that ellipse fails in two unrelated ways — its centre is displaced, which costs coverage and depends on the navigator's own assumed position, and its shape is misread, which costs nothing but meaning and depends only on the latitude.

7 figures · Position fix
Forty-two starts, forty-two answers. Every local optimum coordinate ascent reaches from 42 starts on the same region and the same criterion — a 25° spherical square at a tolerance of ±0.5% — plotted at the share of area it keeps. They run from 36.98 per cent to 67.50, a spread of 30.5 points, and no two of them are the same map: clustered on their scale fields rather than their coefficients, 42 of the 42 are distinct. The two marked starts are the ones anybody would actually use — Chebyshev's map reaches 36.98 per cent and the mean-square map 64.05, and neither is the best this search found. What each projection optimises

A criterion worth using is one whose answer is not unique

Forty-two starts on one region and one tolerance give forty-two different maps, keeping from 36.98 per cent of the area to 67.50. The two starts anybody would actually use — Chebyshev's map and the mean-square map — end 27.1 points apart, which is more than the criterion buys over either of them. And the spread is widest at exactly the tolerance where the criterion is worth using at all, because both facts are the same fact: an objective with a flat top and a sharp edge has somewhere to hide answers.

6 figures · Condition
What a folded net is accurate to, beside what the map it carries is wrong by. For a cube globe of 100 mm radius: each tolerance of cutting and folding a paper net, as a displacement on the assembled sphere, and the seam corner of each of the three face maps beside it. The fold's own error is the largest at 0.955° — 106 km at Earth scale — because a degree of dihedral error moves the far edge of a face by a degree of the face's own radius, which for a cube is 54.7°. The conformal face map's corner is 0.769°, below the whole budget of 1.000°; the gnomonic's is 20.2°, twenty times above it. The families

The map is finer than the paper it is folded from

Thirteen measurements price a polyhedral map in angles, areas and lengths, and none of them is about paper. A hand-folded net is accurate to about a degree of dihedral angle, which displaces the far edge of a cube's face by 0.955° of arc — 106 km at Earth scale — and that floor does not shrink when the globe is made larger, because a degree is a degree. Against it the conformal face map's seam corner is 0.769° on a cube and 0.0040° on an icosahedron, where it is 165 times finer than the sheet can be folded to.

7 figures · Polyhedral
The geoid's curvature is whatever degree the model was stopped at. The Gaussian curvature a geoid model contains, as a fraction of the sphere's own, against the degree the spherical harmonic series is truncated at. It rises in proportion to the cutoff, because a degree-n undulation moves the curvature by n(n+1) − 2 times its own amplitude while the amplitude itself falls only as n to the three halves. The dashed line is the ellipsoid's whole variation from equator to pole, 1.33 per cent; the geoid overtakes it at degree 1332, a half-wavelength of 15 km. Below that resolution the ellipsoid's flattening is the larger term and above it the geoid's own bumps are. The impossibility

The geoid has a curvature only if you say where you stopped

Thirteen measurements have priced the curvature of surfaces that are stated — a sphere, an ellipsoid, a triaxial body, a surface with a hole, real relief. The surface a height actually refers to is none of them. It is an equipotential of the Earth's own gravity, it is only ever given as a series stopped at a degree, and its Gaussian curvature carries two more powers of the degree than its height does. So the omitted height converges, the omitted slope diverges as a logarithm, and the omitted curvature diverges as a power: EGM96 carries 0.36 per cent of the sphere's own curvature, EGM2008 carries 2.19, and a one-kilometre model would carry twenty.

8 figures · Curvature
What reading the seven parameters under the wrong convention costs. The distance between the two published conventions' answers for the same parameter set, at the worst point of the world. The difference is 2s(r × X) exactly — twice the rotation, crossed into the position — so a parameter set with no rotations is immune and one with a large rotation is not: DHDN reaches 152.3 metres and NAD27, whose published transformation is three translations and nothing else, reaches zero. The note beside each bar is the size of that datum's rotation. What the numbers refer to

The rotation has two sign conventions

Eleven essays price a datum transformation's parameters, their fit, their residuals and their uncertainty. None asks what the numbers mean: three of the seven are published under two conventions whose rotations differ in sign, and reading one set with the other formula costs exactly twice the rotation — 55 metres on OSGB36 and 152 on DHDN.

6 figures · Datum
What a rebinning loses depends on where the target's edges are. Two grids of fixed counts, fixed shapes and fixed resolution, with the target slid across the source from perfect alignment to a full cell. Nothing about either grid changes except where its boundaries fall. The loss runs from 27.5 per cent at zero to 56.3 at half a cell — a factor of 2.04 — and the longitude-only curve returns to its starting value at a full cell to six decimal places, which is the periodicity check. A cell boundary that coincides with a target boundary loses nothing, and a grid comparison that does not say where its boundaries are has left that out. What a machine does with it

When the edges do not line up

Rung eight held the cell counts equal so that shape could be compared without the count ratio drowning it, and recorded a doubt: a longitude–latitude source shares its boundaries with a longitude–latitude target wherever their counts share a factor. The mechanism is real and worth a factor of two. It was not what the published number was made of.

8 figures · Cells
Four spheres are wrong about a direction before anything has moved. At 45° of latitude, the worst error over twenty-four starting directions of the azimuth each substituted sphere gives for a geodesic on WGS84, against the distance to its end. Geodetic latitude is wrong by 347″ at one kilometre, and the parametric, authalic and rectifying latitudes by 174″, 116″ and 86.8″ — a half, a third and a quarter of it — flat until a few hundred kilometres. The conformal latitude is right at the start and wrong by 54.3 mas at one kilometre, 5.43″ at 100 and 54.3″ at 1,000; the geocentric latitude starts at 620 mas and joins it. Bessel's sphere, which also corrects the longitude, is exact at every distance to the arithmetic's floor of 1.2e-7″. What is taught wrongly

A bearing on a sphere is decided by its latitude, not its radius

A sphere that stands in for the ellipsoid cannot be wrong about a direction by being the wrong size, because enlarging a sphere moves no angle. What it can be wrong by is the latitude put on it. Geodetic latitude turns every bearing at 45° by up to 347 arcseconds before anything has moved; the conformal latitude starts exact and drifts 54 arcseconds in a thousand kilometres; and only Bessel's sphere, which changes the longitude too, is exact at every distance.

6 figures · Ellipsoid
The pass that fails first stands above the pass between the two deepest basins. For a region grown from 6° to 40° of span at 38° N, the threshold at which the near-optimal aspect set first comes apart — the highest merge in the whole filtration — against the merge between the two deepest basins, which is what the earlier measurement of this quantity reported. The first is higher at every size, by a factor of 1.02 to 2.09. At every size the deciding merge is the last basin joining the optimum's own — a basin whose floor stands 0.019 to 0.191 above the best score — so the set is held together by a near-rival to the best placement, reached over higher ground than the second-best basin is. What each projection optimises

The pass that fails first is not the one that was measured

Three attempts to explain why the near-optimal aspect set comes apart when it does have fitted the height of the pass between the two deepest basins. That is not the pass that fails first. At every region size the set is held together by the last near-rival to join the best placement's own basin — a basin between 2 and 19 per cent worse than the best — over ground 1.02 to 2.09 times higher than the deep pair's pass. The two passes fall at nearly one rate, −1.42 and −1.31 powers of the region's span, so what separates them is a factor, not a law.

6 figures · Choosing