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

Every essay — page 9

Essays 193 to 216 of 339, in the same order.
A 6° query against a cube scheme, and the cells it fetches. The cells of a tangent-warped cube scheme at level 5, with the 29 cells a query of 6° radius touches shaded. The disc's own area is 16.84 cells; the count is 29, because every cell the disc's boundary crosses is fetched as well as every cell inside it. In Hilbert order those cells form six contiguous ranges of identifiers, which is six range scans, and the span from the lowest to the highest covers 91 cells against the 29 wanted. Drawn in Mollweide, with the mesh shown only near the query. What a machine does with it

A query is a disc, and a disc is not a cell

Everything a cell system does is an address lookup except the one question anybody actually asks it: find everything within five kilometres of here. That is a disc, and the number of cells it fetches is not its area divided by a cell's — at the radii a query is really made at, it is three to seventeen times that.

8 figures · Cells The same six contours on Mercator and Lambert cylindrical. The value of a harmonic sum with a summit and a basin in the northern mid-latitudes travels with the point, so the set of points at a stated level is the same set on every map and each contour is exactly right on both panels. Everything a reader measures from them is not: the spacing between neighbouring contours, their lengths, and the area between two of them all change from one panel to the other, and the two panels are the same field. Measuring distortion

The contour is right and the reading is wrong

There is exactly one thing about a field that no projection can get wrong: which points share a value. The contour lines on any two maps of the same field are the same set of points. Every quantity a reader takes off them — the spacing, the length, the area between two of them, the hypsometric curve — is not, and the two kinds of map get different ones wrong.

3 figures · Gradient Shape predicted from field, against shape as published. Clairaut's theorem gives a body's flattening from two numbers of its gravity field: J₂, which is how its mass is arranged, and m = ω²a³/GM, which is how fast it spins. For a body in hydrostatic equilibrium the prediction is the shape, and the diagonal is where such a body sits. Earth is on it to 0.05 per cent — 12 metres at the pole, out of twenty-one kilometres of flattening. Mars is 12.5 per cent off it, which is 2.23 kilometres, and the excess is Tharsis: a body carrying a continent-sized volcanic load is not a fluid figure, so its ellipsoid is not one of its own level surfaces, and its zero of height has to be chosen rather than found. What the numbers refer to

A body with no sea level

On Earth the zero of height is found rather than chosen — water settles onto the equipotential surface by itself. Nowhere else has one, and the difference is measurable: Clairaut's theorem predicts the Earth's flattening from its own gravity field to twelve metres at the pole and misses Mars's by 2.2 kilometres.

7 figures · Bodies The set of aspects within a stated distance of the best, for Robinson over Japan. Each row takes every point of a 36 × 19 × 24 grid in the three aspect parameters that scores within (1 + t) of the best, joins neighbouring points, and identifies the pieces the exact degeneracy relates. At t = 3 it is one connected piece spanning 170° of pole; by t = 1 it has broken into 14 pieces; and by t = 0.3 the largest of them spans 11°. So it is not one valley and it is not one basin — it is a sheet that fractures. What each projection optimises

The shape of the valley

An aspect search returns three numbers, two searches return triples that differ by a hemisphere, and the maps they produce agree. One cause is an exact degeneracy and the rest was called a valley and left unmeasured. Sampled densely, it is neither a valley nor a basin: a connected sheet spanning 170° of pole that fractures into fourteen pieces once the threshold tightens.

6 figures · Choosing Bigger triangles, and how much bigger depends on what is fixed. How well a survey can resolve Gaussian curvature, against the side of its triangles, under three things being held fixed. One triangle: the accuracy improves as the inverse SQUARE of the side, fitted exponent -2.000. A chain of fixed length, which is what every great arc was: bigger triangles mean fewer of them, and the exponent is -1.503 — exactly three halves. A network covering a fixed area: -0.999, exactly one. The trade depends on what a survey is short of. The impossibility

How many triangles it takes

Rung eleven priced one triangle and recorded that a survey observes hundreds. Averaging n of them divides the noise by √n, and n is not free: a chain of fixed length holds fewer big triangles than small ones, so the accuracy improves as the side to the power three halves rather than two. Struve's 141 triangles of forty kilometres are worth exactly Gauss's seven of eighty-five.

6 figures · Curvature The ground two divisions disagree about. seven places across the world dividing the sphere twice under a steady westerly. Outbound, a place belongs to the site that can reach it soonest; inbound, to the site it can reach soonest. The pale tints are the outbound division where the two agree; the dark ground is where they do not, and it is 50.7% of the sphere — 258,530,666 km². Every site's own share of the world barely moves between the two divisions, by at most 3.8%. The two divisions assign nearly the same AMOUNT of ground to each site and assign completely different ground. Paths and directions

A partition under a directed cost has two versions

Dividing a surface among several sites is one question when the cost is a distance and two questions when it is not. Under a steady flow at 0.45 of a vehicle's own speed, the division by who can reach a place soonest and the division by which place can be reached soonest disagree about 50.7 per cent of the sphere — while no site's own share of the world moves by more than 3.87 points.

5 figures · Reach Believing a group takes away the redundancy that would test it. The thirteen degrees of freedom in this network, divided between the two groups, against the weight ratio the adjustment was told. At a ratio of a quarter the edges carry 12.1 of them and at sixteen they carry 0.07. A group's own variance can only be estimated from its own share, so a surveyor who is confident about an instrument has taken away the arithmetic that would have caught the confidence. The two curves sum to thirteen at every ratio, which is the identity that makes this a redistribution rather than a loss. Grids, and what a survey does

The weights are a guess the solve believes

Rung seven finds a decision inside the least-squares problem no residual can see: what to hold fixed. There is a second, made more often and thought about less. Every observation enters with a weight nobody measured, the weights move the coordinates by a factor of 1.8, and the standard check on them can be made to pass by a scaling that moves nothing at all.

9 figures · Reduction A mass, the geoid it raises, and the plumb lines that lean towards it. A sphere of 5 km radius buried 8 km down, denser than its surroundings by 500 kg per cubic metre — a salt dome, or an ore body. Its mass is 261.8 × 10¹² kg, and outside itself its field is a point mass's exactly, so everything above is a closed form. The geoid rises 22 centimetres over it, drawn at 20,000× the true slope; the plumb line leans by at most 2.21 arcseconds, and it does so 5.7 km to the side rather than above the body, because the deflection is the geoid's SLOPE and a slope is zero at a summit. That is the number this site has been able to relate and unable to compute since its practice phase. What the numbers refer to

A deflection is the slope of a mass

The site has computed the exact relation between a geoid slope and a deflection of the vertical — one arcsecond is 4.85 millimetres in a kilometre — and computed no deflection anywhere, because a deflection is the gradient of a geoid and the geoid is a citation. State a mass instead, and every quantity is a closed form: a salt dome five kilometres across bends the plumb line by 2.21 arcseconds.

8 figures · Height Steepest descent on Lambert cylindrical, computed on the ground and on the page. Fifteen routes, each started at the same place twice. The solid line follows the true direction of steepest descent on the sphere; the dashed line follows the direction read off the page at every step, which is what an analysis of a projected grid does. Both take the same length of step on the ground, so the only difference between them is the direction. They part by up to 1517.8 kilometres, against a bearing error of 45.6°. The faint lines are contours of the field, which is seven caps at stated centres and widths. Measuring distortion

Water runs downhill on the ground, not on the page

A drainage network is the set of steepest-descent trajectories of a field, so it is built entirely out of directions. A conformal map preserves those directions exactly and therefore preserves the whole network; an equal-area map does not, and sends a route up to 892 kilometres away from where the water actually goes.

6 figures · Gradient Where Robinson's valley breaks, against how large the region is. The threshold at which the set of near-optimal aspects stops being one connected piece, for square regions of growing size at 38° north. It falls from 2.13 at 6° to 0.27 at 30°, a factor of 8.0. The previous rung measured this at one region and quoted "about twice the optimum"; that value belongs to a small region, and the prediction that it should fall as the region grows is what this tests. What each projection optimises

Where the valley breaks in two

The previous rung found a near-optimal set that is one connected sheet at a loose threshold and fourteen basins at a tight one, and explained the transition without testing it. The explanation is a prediction about region size and projection sharpness: swept over both, the threshold falls from 2.13 to 0.27 as a region grows from 6° to 30°, three projections lie on nearly one curve, and a fourth declines to join for a reason worth having.

6 figures · Choosing Three implementations of one projection, and three different distortions. The spread in angular deformation between linear, Catmull–Rom and Aitken interpolations of Robinson's own table, at 60° of longitude. It is exactly zero at every fifth degree, because all three pass through the tabulated rows, and it is not zero anywhere else: 37 of 87 latitudes differ by more than half a degree and the worst is 8.42°. The graticules the three draw differ by 4.2 parts per thousand of the map's own span, which is under the width of a printed line. The families

A projection defined by a table has an interpolation in it

One member of this library has no formula: Robinson set nineteen pairs of numbers by eye and the table is the definition. Three published interpolations of it draw graticules that differ by four parts in a thousand of the map's span and report angular deformations that differ by 8.4 degrees.

6 figures · Families Hilbert order on one face, as a curve. The order in which Hilbert numbering visits the 64 cells of one cube face at level 3. The line never leaves a cell without entering one that shares an edge with it — that is what makes it a space-filling curve, and it is why two cells with nearby identifiers are usually near each other on the ground. What a machine does with it

The address is a curve through the sphere

A database does not fetch a set of cells, it reads ranges of identifiers — so the cost of a query is how many runs its cells form, not how many cells it needs. Hilbert order wins that measurement and loses the one usually quoted for it: its neighbouring cells are further apart in identifier than row-major's, on average and at worst.

8 figures · Cells The four places, and every distance between them. London, New York, Tokyo, Sydney on a Mollweide projection, with every great circle between a pair drawn. The six ground distances run from 5,570 km to 16,994 km, and they are the whole of the input to every figure in this ladder — no coordinate, no projection and no coastline enters any of them. The arcs are drawn only to say which pair each number belongs to; on this page they are curves, and on the ground they are the shortest routes. The impossibility

Four cities that cannot be drawn to scale

Every impossibility in this field so far has been about a surface. This one is about four numbers: London, New York, Tokyo and Sydney have six distances between them, and no four dots on any sheet of paper have those six separations. The test is a determinant Cayley wrote down in 1841, and it comes out −3.34 × 10²³ where zero is required.

6 figures · Embedding The shortest route between two regions, and the pair it runs between. Europe and the conterminous United States, with the shortest route between them: 3,581 km, attained at one point on each boundary. The pair is not a corner, not a centre and not anything a reader could name — it is wherever two edges happen to come closest, which depends on the whole shape of both. The dashed route is the pair Gall–Peters makes look nearest: 4,085 km, which is 505 kilometres long, and its two ends sit 2135 kilometres from the true pair between them. Paths and directions

The shortest route between two coasts

Ten rungs find the shortest path between two points. Between two regions the answer is attained at a pair of boundary points, and which pair is not the pair any page makes look nearest — a cylindrical map picks a pair 2,135 kilometres from the right one across the Atlantic, and 1,716 kilometres wrong between Chile and New Zealand, where its route is 22.5 per cent long.

5 figures · Paths OSGB36 then DHDN, done four ways. How far each route lands from the truth — applying the two transformations one after the other — at 54.5° north, 2.0° west. Composing them into one affine map is exact, because two affine maps compose into an affine map and nothing is dropped. Describing that composition with seven parameters again leaves 0.19 millimetres, because two linearised rotations compose into something with a symmetric part that seven numbers cannot hold. Adding the fourteen published numbers in pairs — which is what a chain is usually done with — leaves 7.4 millimetres. Logarithmic from a micrometre. What the numbers refer to

A chain of transformations does not close

Two datum transformations applied one after the other are not the sum of their fourteen published numbers. The gap is seven millimetres in Britain, doing the two in the other order moves the answer twenty, and the rotation matrix everybody prints is not a rotation.

7 figures · Datum The part of a request no conformal map can supply — scale falling with distance from the centre. The difference between the requested scale field and the nearest achievable one, over the patch, with the sign shown by colour. The RMS is 1.81e-1 in the logarithm of the scale and the worst single point is 4.91e-1. This is not an error: it is the part of the request that no conformal map of any kind can grant, and its SHAPE is the answer — it says where the request was impossible, which a single number cannot. What each projection optimises

The nearest map to an impossible request

Rung seven found that not every distortion can be asked for. It never asked what happens when one is asked for anyway — and the answer has a shape: the achievable fields are the solutions of an elliptic equation, a request is a point off that set, and the nearest point leaves a residual whose floor is the curvature rather than the size of the ask.

6 figures · Condition The same kernels, across an edge. Each kernel measured over the same five rasters as the smooth measurement, on a field that carries a step across a tilted line instead of a smooth function. The solid lines are the edge and the faint ones the smooth field. The orders on the smooth field are nearest 1.00, bilinear 1.98, cubic 2.93; across the edge they are nearest 0.78, bilinear 0.58, cubic 0.60 — within a factor of 1.33 of one another, and the fastest of them belongs to nearest-neighbour, which does no interpolating at all. The ranking a smooth field establishes does not survive a discontinuity, and a real raster is mostly edges. What a machine does with it

An edge has no order of convergence

On a smooth field the three resampling kernels converge at orders 1, 2 and 3 and the choice is obvious. Across a discontinuity they converge at 0.78, 0.58 and 0.60 — within a factor of 1.4 of each other, in an order that puts nearest-neighbour first, and a real raster is mostly edges.

8 figures · Dataset A geodesic circle on Mollweide, and the two models of where it goes. A circle of geodesic radius ρ about 20°E 45°N, projected. The dashed outline is where the indicatrix says it goes — the ellipse a Tissot figure draws — and the thin solid one adds the quadratic term, which is the flexion and skewness this ladder measures. At 16° the indicatrix is out by 13.5 per cent of the figure's own size and the second-order model by 2.20 — a factor of 6.16, which is what one more derivative buys. Measuring distortion

The size at which the second derivative arrives

Six essays have measured a projection's second derivative at points, over regions and under transformations, and none of them says at what size it stops being a curiosity. The answer needs a figure with an extent rather than a point, and it is smaller than anybody drawing a national map would guess: the indicatrix alone places a shape to one part in a thousand out to thirteen kilometres.

7 figures · Flexion How large a blunder has to be before the test notices. A blunder of increasing size put into the least-checked observation of a braced quadrilateral, with the standardised residual it produces. The horizontal line is the critical value the test uses, and the vertical one is the minimal detectable bias — δ₀σ/√r, which is 87 millimetres for this observation and is computed from the network's DESIGN, before any observation is made. Below it nothing is flagged; above it everything is. The observation's redundancy number is 0.144, so it is checked by a seventh of an observation and hides six-sevenths of whatever is wrong with it. Grids, and what a survey does

The blunder the network cannot see

A least-squares adjustment has no concept of a mistake. The smallest blunder its test will find in the least-checked leg of a braced quadrilateral is 87 millimetres, and by the time it fires a station has moved by nearly ten times the accuracy the same adjustment reports for it.

6 figures · Reduction Every projection's angular deformation, and the tolerance that judges it. The whole library on one logarithmic axis, with the tolerance drawn as a line. The population is bimodal: the projections that satisfy the condition sit at 2.09e-6 and below, the ones that do not at 3.85e-1 and above, and there is nothing between. The tolerance could be moved anywhere in that gap — a factor of 1.84e+5 — without changing one verdict. Larger marks are projections that claim the property. What is taught wrongly

The tolerance that decides the verdict

Eight rungs of this ladder hand out verdicts, and every one rests on a tolerance chosen once, in the site's second phase, at sixty times a measured noise floor. Swept, it decides nothing: the population is bimodal, the tolerance sits in a gap 238,000 times wide for conformality and 646 million times wide for equal area, and the verdict with the least room is a passing one whose margin is the arithmetic's rather than the map's.

6 figures · Audit The corner an equal-area face map puts in a feature, and the one the gnomonic does not. A great circle crossing the seam between two faces, drawn on each face's own map and unfolded flat, with the angle between the incoming and outgoing tangents plotted against how obliquely it crosses. Under the equal-area face map every solid gives a corner: zero for a perpendicular crossing, where the two faces are symmetric about the edge, peaking near thirty degrees of obliquity and falling again as the crossing lies down along the edge. Under the gnomonic it is zero at every angle on every solid, which is the flat line on the axis. The families

The gnomonic crosses a seam without a corner

Eight rungs choose a solid, a face map and where to cut. This one is about a seam the net does not cut, where two faces stay joined and carry two different maps — and the expectation was a corner in every feature crossing one. At the midpoint of the edge — which is where every crossing here is taken, and which turns out to be the one place on it a face's own mirror forces the corner to vanish — the gnomonic gives none at any obliquity on any Platonic solid, and the equal-area face map gives one of up to 0.39 degrees.

6 figures · Polyhedral The least error a flat picture can have, against how much sphere it spans. The same configuration of places, shrunk about its own centroid so that every bearing is kept and only the span changes, with the least worst-case relative error of the best flat picture at each size. Both axes are logarithmic. The fitted slope over the rows below ninety degrees is 2.0246: the error falls as the SQUARE of the diameter. That is Gauss's theorem arriving as a number for a finite set — curvature is a second derivative, so its first effect on a distance is quadratic in the separation — and it is why a county fits on a sheet and a hemisphere does not. The impossibility

How wrong a flat picture has to be

The rung below proves no flat picture of four places is exact and leaves the size of the failure to a determinant nobody can read. Measured directly, the least error falls as the square of how much sphere the places span — fitted exponent 2.0088 — and the same exponent comes back from five different arrangements while the constant in front of it moves by a factor of seventeen.

5 figures · Embedding The plan, the crossing that was flown, and the one a right forecast would have given. A crossing of NaN km planned against a jet forecast to sit on the fortieth parallel, flown through a jet that is actually 6 degrees further south, and re-planned six times on the way. Committing to the plan costs 167.81 hours. Re-planning costs 165.84. A vehicle that had known where the jet was would have taken 163.21. So the wrong forecast is worth 4.60 hours and re-planning recovers 1.97 of them. Paths and directions

A crossing is a chain of decisions

Eleven rungs hand back a curve and stop, and nothing anybody flies is decided once. Re-planning is worth exactly nothing when the forecast turns out right — a sub-path of an optimal path is optimal, and the chain is the plan. When it turns out wrong it recovers 19 per cent of the cost at two decisions and 83 at eighteen, and never all of it.

5 figures · Paths The pass between the basins, measured rather than bracketed. The height of the lowest path from one near-optimal basin to the other, for regions of growing size. It is found by sorting the score surface and joining cells in order, so it is the minimax path's own height rather than the level at which a bisection stops finding two pieces. The fitted exponent is -1.60 at a coefficient of determination of 0.913. The previous rung's level-set measurement gave −1.33 and the argument predicts −1, so measuring the height directly moves the answer FURTHER from the prediction rather than towards it. What each projection optimises

The height of the pass between two basins

The previous rung recorded a shortfall: the fracture threshold falls as the −1.33 power where the argument predicts −1, and the difference was supposed to be the height of the pass. It is not. Measuring the pass directly gives −1.60, which is further from the prediction, and the two basins turn out to be exact symmetric copies with nothing to decompose.

6 figures · Choosing