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

Every essay — page 5

Essays 97 to 120 of 339, in the same order.
The route at height does not lie above the route on the ground. London to Tokyo, solved at the surface and again at a stated height, with the two ground tracks compared point for point. At a cruising altitude of eleven kilometres the two part by 11.8 metres; the departure is proportional to the height, at a fitted slope of 0.997. On a sphere the same measurement returns 2.7e-9 metres, because the offset of a sphere is a sphere and the two geodesics coincide exactly. The offset of an ellipsoid is not an ellipsoid, and this is what that costs. Paths and directions

The shortest route is not at sea level

Ten rungs route on a surface and nothing is ever flown on one. The offset of a sphere is a sphere, so at altitude the great circle is the great circle. The offset of an ellipsoid is not an ellipsoid — its radii of curvature are M + h and N + h, which belong to no ellipsoid — so the shortest route at cruising height does not lie above the shortest route on the ground.

8 figures · Paths Two conventions, and neither of them finds the blunder. A blunder of 350 mm added to leg 3 of a closed traverse, producing a misclosure of 350 mm — one part in 8344, which most specifications would accept. Bowditch's rule shares the misclosure out in proportion to leg length; the Transit rule shares it in proportion to each leg's component along the axis being corrected. Both close the figure exactly, so both are valid; they disagree with each other by up to 14 mm; and neither puts more than 104 mm of correction on the leg that is actually wrong. A rule for distributing a misclosure is a convention for producing consistent numbers, and it is not an instrument for finding errors. Grids, and what a survey does

The two ways to spread a misclosure

Bowditch's rule and the Transit rule take the same closed figure and the same misclosure and disagree about which legs were wrong. Both close it exactly, neither puts the correction on the leg that actually carries the blunder, and no measurement can settle which is right.

7 figures · Reduction A straight line stored in Web Mercator, and where it really goes. Two points 5570 kilometres apart, joined by a straight segment in the plane the file's coordinates are in. Drawn on that plane it is a straight line and looks like the route; on the ground it is the curve marked measured, and the geodesic between the same two endpoints is the other one. The profile below is the distance between them along the line, reaching 718 kilometres at 49 per cent of the way across. Nothing here is an error in the data: both endpoints are exact, and the whole of the discrepancy is the word straight. What a machine does with it

A straight segment is a claim about a plane

Two exact endpoints, joined by a straight line in the plane the file is stored in. On the ground the line is 718 kilometres from the route it claims between New York and London, and 2,961 between London and Tokyo. The departure grows as the square of the length — fitted exponent 2.001 — so a stated tolerance costs vertices as a square root.

7 figures · Dataset How each projection escapes being one to one. Eighteen projections, and the theorem allows no fourth column. A map of the whole sphere either leaves ground undrawn, or draws one place as a curve, or is cut so that one ground curve appears twice — and 11 of the eighteen do more than one of those. The three columns are a solid angle, a count of places and a page length, which is why they are three columns rather than one score: there is no rate at which a hemisphere converts into a pole. The impossibility

No map of the whole sphere is one to one

Eleven essays establish that no map preserves distance, and every step of that argument needs a distance. There is a second impossibility underneath it that needs nothing at all: a sphere is compact and has no boundary, so a continuous map of it into the page cannot also be one to one. Eighteen library projections, eighteen escapes, and not one of them free.

8 figures · Topology The order the corrections go in, and what it costs. Setting out a 51.8 km line on the UTM zone 31N means turning a grid bearing into an azimuth to observe, and there are two corrections: the meridian convergence, 0.8669° here, and the arc-to-chord correction, 6.242″. Each bar carries the lateral offset it produces at the far end of the line, because a bearing error is a number nobody can picture and a sideways miss is the thing that misses. The exact arc-to-chord and the classical formula every manual gives differ by 0.0044″, which is 1.10 mm at the far end — small, real, and the reason the corrections have an order rather than a sum. Grids, and what a survey does

Setting out runs the chain backwards

Turning a design coordinate into something to observe on the ground means undoing the reduction chain, and undoing a chain reverses the order as well as the operations. Two of the corrections do not commute, and getting them the wrong way round misses by a millimetre at fifty kilometres.

5 figures · Reduction Which edges to cut is a spanning tree. The icosahedron's faces as nodes and its 30 shared edges as links. A net keeps 19 of those joins and cuts the rest, and the joins have to form a spanning tree — connected, so the net is one piece, and acyclic, so it lies flat. The heavy links are one such tree. The number of distinct nets is therefore the number of spanning trees of this graph, which Kirchhoff's theorem gives as a determinant: 5,184,000 for the icosahedron. The families

The cut has to go somewhere

A solid lies flat only if it is cut open, and which edges to cut is a spanning tree of the face graph — so the icosahedron has exactly 5,184,000 distinct nets, a determinant rather than an estimate. All 384 of the cube's were laid flat and tested: not one overlaps, while an irregular tetrahedron overlaps in four of its sixteen.

9 figures · Polyhedral Everywhere within 3,000 km of London, drawn in Lambert cylindrical. The set of places exactly 3,000 kilometres from London by the shortest route, projected point by point. On the ground it is a circle — every point of it is the same distance from the centre, in every direction. On this page the longest radius from the drawn centre is 4.17 times the shortest, so a reader with a ruler measures two different distances for one ground distance depending on which way the ruler points. The two extreme radii are drawn. Paths and directions

A circle of a distance is not a circle

Eleven essays in this field have followed a route across a map. A range ring is not a route — it is the edge of a set — and drawing one exposes a failure the route essays cannot: the same ground distance comes out 4.17 times longer in one direction than another on a common projection, and 13.03 times at 70° north.

8 figures · Reach A 20° shape across the antimeridian, in the space where the numbers live. Longitude runs across the page from −180° to 180°, which is where the failure is: the shape is one rectangle on the ground and two pieces in the numbering, and every operation that treats longitude as a real number sees the two. The bounding box comes out 359° wide instead of 20°, the planar area comes out 17 times too large because the shoelace encloses the complement, and the midpoint of a segment from one edge to the other lands 20015 kilometres away — the antipode of where it belongs. The true area, from the closed form, is 4,920,667 square kilometres. What a machine does with it

The antimeridian is a cut in the numbers

A twenty-degree box across 180° has a bounding box of 359.4°, a planar area seventeen times too large, and a midpoint 20,015 kilometres from where it belongs — which is the antipode, exactly. Moving the cut moves the failure and never removes it, because a circle cannot be numbered by an interval.

7 figures · Dataset The two reductions, at a grid factor of 1.0004. A measurement made on the ground has to be brought to the ellipsoid and then to the grid, and the two corrections have opposite signs. The elevation factor is R/(R+h) and always shrinks; the grid factor here is 1.0004, which stretches. Their product is the only number a surveyor can use. They cancel exactly at 2551 metres. At 1500 metres the combined factor is 165 parts per million, which is 1.65 metres on a 10 kilometre baseline. What the numbers refer to

The ground is not the grid

A tape measure on a hillside has to be brought down to the ellipsoid and then out onto the map, and the two corrections have opposite signs. On a grid whose scale factor exceeds one there is exactly one elevation where they cancel — 2,551 metres, for a factor of 1.0004.

5 figures · Height Every candidate fitted to one map's graticule, ranked by what is left over. The map is drawn in Conformal conic over a region 40° tall centred at 45° north, and the projection is not told to the fit. Each candidate is evaluated at the same 121 graticule crossings, its own parameters are searched, the best plane similarity between its output and the picture is removed, and what remains is drawn as a proportion of the map's own width on a logarithmic scale. Conformal conic fits to 1.3e-10, which is the arithmetic's floor; the next candidate is 3.7e+7 times worse. What is taught wrongly

A map does not say what it is

Every map on this site is one the site drew, from a projection it chose. Every map a reader has ever used is the other kind — a picture whose projection is a sentence in a corner, a legend, or nothing at all. The graticule is enough to recover it: fit every candidate to the crossings and rank what is left over.

6 figures · Identify Eight world maps ranked by their second derivative. Each projection's root-mean-square flexion and skewness over the whole sphere, combined and ranked. The first-order ranking of the same eight by Kavrayskiy's criterion is given beside each bar; Spearman's rank correlation between the two orderings is 0.69. The two criteria are measuring different derivatives of the same maps and there is no reason for them to agree. Measuring distortion

The second derivative has its own ranking

Rank eight world maps by how much they stretch and Mercator comes sixth of eight. Rank the same eight by how much they bend and it comes third. The two halves of the second-order score disagree with each other more sharply than either disagrees with the first-order one — Spearman 0.45 against 0.69.

9 figures · Flexion A map for pointing, not for locating. Craig's retroazimuthal projection, centred on Mecca. The straight line from any point to the centre makes an angle with the map's vertical equal to the true initial bearing from that place to the centre — checked here at 169 points, worst disagreement 5.7e-14 degrees. The bearings printed beside each line are computed on the sphere with no projection in them. What each projection optimises

A map that cannot be read backwards

Craig's projection answers one question exactly — lay a straight edge from any place to the centre and read the compass course, right to 6 × 10⁻¹⁴ of a degree. It pays by folding: 78°S and 48°S on the same meridian are drawn at the same point, so no inverse exists and nothing else can be read off it at all.

9 figures · Condition How large a map has to be before a wrong projection stops fitting it. Three rivals fitted to a Mercator graticule centred at 45° north, over regions from 1° to 70° of half-extent. The residual is the shape difference alone, with the best scale, rotation and offset removed, and both axes are logarithmic. The horizontal rule is a fifth of a per cent of the map's width — about the width of a drawn line on a printed sheet — and where a curve is below it, no measurement of that map can tell the two projections apart, however carefully it is made. What is taught wrongly

Two projections that cannot be told apart

Over a small enough region every projection is the same picture, so the question is how small. The answer is not one number: two conformal projections need twelve degrees of extent before their graticules can be separated, and two projections with different anisotropy separate below one.

6 figures · Identify The same coordinate on four datums. One pair of numbers — 2.0° west, 54.5° north — read as a coordinate on OSGB36, ED50, NAD27 and on WGS84, and plotted where each reading puts the mark on the ground. The spread runs to 195 metres, and the height changes by 51, 44, 47 metres, which is the component nobody quotes. What the numbers refer to

The third coordinate moves too

A datum shift is quoted as a horizontal displacement because horizontal is what people look at. The transformation acts on a three-dimensional point, and its vertical component is between a quarter and a half of the horizontal one — 51 metres, for a British coordinate.

7 figures · Height The minimum-distortion conformal map of an elongated region, 30° by 10°. The conformal projection of an elongated region, 30° by 10° whose scale is constant on the boundary, which is Chebyshev's criterion, obtained by fitting eight terms of a series rather than by choosing a named projection. The scale factor runs from 0.98640 to 1.00000, a spread of 1.01379; on the boundary itself the largest departure from constancy is 2.13e-7 in the log, which is what the fit achieved and not what it was told. Each dot is an interior sample shaded by its own departure from the boundary's scale. What each projection optimises

Solving for the map instead of choosing it

Chebyshev's criterion has sat on this site since its second phase with one case it could be applied to: the spherical cap, whose answer is the stereographic projection. For any other region the site stated the criterion and stopped. It is a linear least-squares fit, and the fitted map beats every named projection over the region it was fitted to.

8 figures · Condition One face of an icosahedron, two ways. The same spherical face mapped onto the same flat triangle by two different rules, with a grid of marks whose size is the local areal factor. The gnomonic map draws every great circle straight and stretches the corners by a factor of 1.50; the area-preserving map holds the areal factor at one to a part in a million and pays in shape, reaching 11.9° of angular deformation against the gnomonic's 8.0°. Both take the face's boundary to the face's boundary, which is what lets the pieces still fit together. The families

What a face can preserve

The obvious map onto a polyhedron's face is the gnomonic, and it draws every great circle straight while stretching the corners by a factor of 1.50. Replace it with a construction that holds the areal factor at one to a part in a million and the shape error rises from 8.0° to 11.9° — the same trade the whole sphere forces, arriving on a piece of it a twentieth the size.

8 figures · Polyhedral Which projection wins, by the first derivative and by the second. Each column is a region, with the projections listed in the order Kavrayskiy's first-order criterion puts them in and the figure at the right of each row giving that projection's rank under the second-order criterion — flexion and skewness aggregated the same way. The rank correlations are Europe 0.83, the conterminous United States 0.81, the tropics 0.90, a cap of 30° radius 0.88, so the two orders agree broadly and disagree in detail. Where it matters is the winner: over a cap of 30° radius the choice moves from Albers equal-area conic to Lambert azimuthal equal-area, while Europe and the conterminous United States and the tropics keep theirs. A criterion that changed every answer would be suspect and one that changed none would be decoration. Measuring distortion

The second derivative over a region

Flexion has been measured at points and over the whole sphere, and never over a region — which is the only unit anybody chooses a projection for. Doing it finds that the second-order criterion moves the winner in one region of four, and that one projection in the library has no second derivative at all.

8 figures · Flexion Which of eight places is nearest, decided on the ground and decided on the page. Every cell of the window shaded by which of eight places across Europe is nearest on the ground, with the cells the page's own answer would hand to a different site drawn in the failure colour. Plate carrée misassigns 13.67 per cent of the window's ground area — 3,058 thousand square kilometres. The misassigned cells are not scattered: they lie in bands along the boundaries, which is what a systematic error looks like and what a sampled test of a few query points is least likely to find. Paths and directions

Nearest of many is a partition

One reach question with one source is a disc. With several sources it is a division of the whole surface, every place belonging to whichever source is nearest — and computing that division in the plane the data is stored in hands away between 0.75 and 22.16 per cent of the ground, in unbroken strips up to 1,591 kilometres across.

8 figures · Reach Only one of a grid's five parameters changes the map. The same ground point written on the British National Grid and on UTM zone 31N, with the difference between the two coordinate pairs taken apart. The largest term by four orders of magnitude is where the two grids put zero — 5544 km, being a different central meridian, a different true origin and different false constants, all of which move every coordinate and no distance. The datum, which is the term everybody names, moves the ground 106 m. And the whole geometric difference between two transverse Mercators is their scale factors — 0.9996012717 against 0.9996 — which at this point is 50 cm. Four of a grid's five parameters are bookkeeping; the fifth is the map. Grids, and what a survey does

Two grids over the same ground

One point in the English Midlands is 406,788 east on the British grid and 167,478 east on UTM. Separating the difference properly leaves a surprise — only one of a grid's five parameters changes the map, and it is not any of the four that dominate the number.

7 figures · Reduction 5 of 400 nearest-neighbour queries change answer in the plane. 40 sites and 400 queries over -20° to 40° east and 35° to 70° north, each query answered twice — once by geodesic distance and once by straight-line distance in the stored plane. They agree 98.8 per cent of the time, which is why the operation survives, and the 5 that differ are marked. The mechanism is not that the plane is wrong by a lot but that its scale factor varies: over this region it spans 139 per cent, and every disagreement is a contest closer than that — the worst margin measured is 6.4 per cent. The furthest a wrong answer is from the right one is 24 kilometres. What a machine does with it

Nearest is a question about the metric

Asked in the plane the data is stored in, a nearest-neighbour query returns a different site for 5 of 400 queries over Europe on Web Mercator — and 103 of 400 on the plate carrée, with the wrong answer up to 309 kilometres further away. Every disagreement is a contest closer than the region's own scale spread, and over a city there are none.

7 figures · Dataset Ground north, on a map that has the pole on it. Every arrow points along its own meridian, towards the pole, and the pole is at the centre. Walking once anticlockwise round any loop enclosing it turns the arrow once anticlockwise as well: the index is 1, counted as a winding number with no distance anywhere in the calculation. A field like this cannot be combed flat. There is no way to choose a page direction for north at every point of the neighbourhood without the choice tearing somewhere, and the somewhere is the point in the middle. The impossibility

North cannot be up everywhere

Ground north is a field of arrows on the sphere, and a field of arrows on a sphere must vanish somewhere. The failure is not measured, it is counted: the indices of the zeros sum to two, obtained here as a winding number in seven different charts with no distance anywhere in the calculation, and it is the same two that Gauss–Bonnet gets by integrating curvature.

8 figures · Topology Fitting a polynomial to Mollweide, and what each order buys. An affine, a quadratic and a cubic transformation fitted by least squares between the sphere and Mollweide over patches from 8° down to 0.5° radius, centred at 20°E 40°N. Each is a straight line on these axes and its slope is one more than its own degree: 1 → 2.00, 2 → 3.00, 3 → 4.00. That is not a coincidence and it is this ladder's subject: the first thing a model of degree d cannot represent is the term of degree d+1, so the affine model's error is governed by the second derivative — the flexion and skewness measured everywhere else here. Measuring distortion

A local model has an order

Every georeferencing tool fits a polynomial between two coordinate systems and the choice of degree is usually made by counting control points. What it buys is an order of convergence — 2, 3 and 4, measured — and the first term an affine model cannot hold is the second derivative this ladder has spent five essays on.

5 figures · Flexion The half-extent at which each rival stops fitting a Gall–Peters graticule. For each candidate, the size of region at which its best fit to a Gall–Peters map first leaves a residual of a fifth of a per cent of the map's width. Below that size the two are the same picture. The numbers are half-extents in degrees of latitude, at 20° north, with the plane affine transformation removed; a bar at 90° is a rival that never separates at all within the range searched. What is taught wrongly

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.

4 figures · Identify Which corrections a 10 mm job may leave out. Each correction inverted: the line length — or, for the last row, the patch radius — at which that correction alone reaches 10 mm, for a job 150 m above the ellipsoid on 2° of ground, 0.0° from the British National Grid's central meridian. The tightest is the slope reduction at 16 m. Three of the four rows are linear in the tolerance, so this ranking is the same at a millimetre and at a decimetre; what does change it is the site — move the job up a mountain or onto steeper ground and the order is different, which is why a specification's list is not transferable. Grids, and what a survey does

The tolerance decides the model

Every correction inverts to a distance — the line length at which it alone exceeds a stated tolerance. The ranking those distances produce is the same at a millimetre and at a decimetre, and it is different for two jobs at the same tolerance on different ground.

5 figures · Reduction