Where the inverse problem stops converging, 3° around the antipode of London
Every target in a 6° square centred on the point diametrically opposite London, shaded by how many iterations Vincenty's inverse formula needed to find the geodesic to it. 3 of 625 — 0% — never converged at all, and the worst success took 113 steps against a handful anywhere else on Earth. The failure is not a defect in the formula: near the antipode the shortest path is nearly ambiguous, and an iteration looking for one answer is being asked which of many.
It is one of 12 figures drawn by the same construction, and the drawing above is this one with nothing changed.
3 essays call it. Every call below passes it something, because a placement that passes nothing draws whichever member of the family the generator happens to default to rather than the one its essay argues about.
Where it is called
Changing this changes every one of these figures.
Geodesics on the ellipsoid, and why they are hard
The shortest path on a flattened Earth is not a plane curve, has no closed form, and can be longer or shorter than the spherical answer depending on which way it runs. Every practical method is a series or an iteration, and the correction changes sign.
The route with no shortest path
Between a point and the point diametrically opposite there are infinitely many shortest routes and no shortest route, and the standard formula for the distance between two places stops converging in a neighbourhood of it. The failure is a property of the question rather than a defect in the answer.
Where the shortest route stops being the only one
On a sphere there is exactly one point with no shortest route from a given place: the antipode. On the ellipsoid the Earth actually is, that point is an arc — sixty-six kilometres of the antipodal meridian for a point on the equator, half a kilometre for one at 85°, and every point of it reachable by two different geodesics of exactly equal length.