Curvature — the series
-
No map is faithful
Not "no map yet", and not "no map at page size". Gaussian curvature can be computed from inside a surface, a sphere has some and a plane has none, and that closes the question permanently.
-
What can be unrolled
A cylinder is obviously curved and is intrinsically flat, so it lays out on a table with nothing stretched. A sphere is not. The distinction is exactly zero Gaussian curvature, and it is why paper tubes exist and paper globes do not.
-
The trade-off is two lines
Conformal means the two principal scales are equal. Equal-area means their product is one. Both at once forces both to one, which is an isometry, which the curvature forbids. That is the entire argument.
-
Total curvature and the scale rule
The impossibility has a size. A region covering a fraction of the sphere carries a fixed amount of curvature that any flat map must absorb, and for a circular region the least distortion any conformal projection can achieve is a closed form nobody can beat.
-
Measuring curvature from inside
A flatlander with a ruler can find out that its world is round, by drawing a triangle and adding the angles. Gauss–Bonnet turns that into an exact statement, and the total curvature of a closed surface turns out to be a number obtained by counting.
-
How small is flat enough
A builder works in plane coordinates and a national mapping agency does not, and the line between them is not a convention. The unavoidable error of treating a patch of the Earth as flat grows as the square of its size, and the size at any stated tolerance is a number.
-
The curvature of the Earth is not one number
An ellipsoid's Gaussian curvature varies by 1.35% from equator to pole, so the sphere is not developable onto the ellipsoid any more than the plane is onto the sphere. The spherical approximation is a projection with an irreducible cost, and the cost is 6,739 parts per million.
-
A direction carried round a loop
Carry a bearing round a circuit, keeping it as parallel to itself as the surface allows, and it comes back turned. Round a parallel at 45° the turn is 4.443 radians and the cap enclosed is 1.840, and they sum to exactly one revolution — so the turning is not the curvature, and on a cone it is all of one and none of the other.
-
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.
-
Two surfaces with the same curvature
The ladder's base says curvature is the obstruction to a faithful map. It has never asked whether curvature is the whole obstruction — and it is, locally: there is a whole family of surfaces with the unit sphere's curvature at every point, none of them a sphere, and a geodesic circle drawn on one agrees with the same circle on another to one part in 10¹⁴.
-
Impossible in two derivatives, possible in one
The impossibility this whole collection rests on computes a second derivative, so it is a statement about maps that have two. Take one away and it is false: a corrugation restores an exact length while converging to the map that does not, and iterating it gives a flattening whose derivative converges and whose curvature runs to half a million.
-
The places where a map is exactly right
Nine essays on this ladder say a map cannot be right everywhere. None asks where it IS right — and the answer is a curve, a pair of curves, or two isolated places, never a patch. Measured across fourteen projections the set's neighbourhood shrinks with an exponent of 0.48, 1.0 or 2.0, and the value the impossibility forbids is 0.
-
Where the surface curves the other way
The impossibility of a perfect map is usually argued on surfaces whose curvature is positive everywhere. The surface a map of the ground actually depicts is not one of them: a stated terrain is saddle-shaped over 79 per cent of its curved area, its curvature runs to twenty-two thousand times the Earth's own, and even a single smooth hill is concave over 89 per cent of itself.
-
How big a triangle it takes
Gauss proved that a surface-dweller can read the curvature off a triangle's angles. Doing it is another matter: a fifty-kilometre triangle has 5.49 seconds of excess, a one-second theodolite gives that excess a standard deviation of 1.73, and reading K to one per cent needs a side of 281 kilometres. Not one of the great surveys built a triangle within a factor of three of that.
-
How many triangles it takes
Pricing one triangle left the fact that a survey observes hundreds unaccounted for. 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.
-
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.
-
A triangle reads the geoid's curvature, and that one converges
The geoid's Gaussian curvature at a point has no value: its spectrum carries two more powers of the degree than the height's, and the sum never settles. A surveyor's triangle does not measure it at a point. By Gauss–Bonnet its excess is the total curvature over its area, which on the geoid is the flux of the deflection of the vertical through its three sides — a first derivative averaged along lines, and that sum converges. A fifty-kilometre triangle reads 0.64 per cent of the sphere's curvature from the geoid at EGM2008's degree and 0.68 at degree 36,000, where the curvature at a point has grown sixteenfold. The quantity nothing could measure was the one nobody measures.
-
A levelling loop reads the circulation, and the geoid has none
A triangle of angles reads the geoid as the flux of the deflection of the vertical through its sides. A levelling loop is the other integral round the same curve, the circulation, and at the geoid that one is identically zero, because the deflection is the slope of a height. What a levelling loop run on the ground misses by is the Jacobian of gravity and height over the loop: 31 mm round a fifty-kilometre loop in a stated mountain range, none of it from the free-air gradient that changes gravity by 1,333 mGal there, uncorrelated with what the triangle reads, and two and a half times the noise of the levelling where the triangle's reading is a fiftieth of its own.
-
A levelling loop weighs the root, and a triangle weighs the mountain
A mountain range is carried partly by a root of light crust beneath it, and a survey that knows the ground can ask how much. Put a root thirty kilometres down under a stated range and it moves a levelling loop's misclosure by 85 per cent as much as the mountains' own rock does, and a triangle's excess by 16 per cent: the root's gravity is a smoothed copy of the ground, and a smoothed copy crosses the contours. Read against their noise, pinning the root's share to a tenth takes about 2,700 fifty-kilometre loops, a million triangles or 550 astronomic stations — and if the rock's density is unknown too, a triangle cannot tell a compensated mountain from a lighter one.
-
A loop reads a root's depth from its own pattern, and a triangle reads none of it
A levelling loop and a geodetic triangle respond to a buried root in proportions that change with its depth, so their ratio looked like a gauge of how deep a range is compensated. It is not, because a triangle's response to a root at 30 km is a hundredth of its own noise. The depth is there in the loops alone: a root changes the pattern of misclosures from loop to loop as it deepens, and 1,600 loops of 50 km place a 10 km root within a factor of 1.5 three times in four and a 30 km root about half the time. A 60 km root is not placed even by 6,400, and when the depth is fitted rather than stated, such a root is read as a light shallow one carrying 25 per cent of the mass where it carries 60.
-
Gravity is worth four loops a station, and the background still hides a deep root
Levelling loops alone place a range's compensating root at ten kilometres three times in four from 1,600 loops, and do not place one at sixty from 6,400. Gravity measured on the ground reads the root's attraction directly, and a station is worth about four loops for a shallow root and two for one at thirty kilometres. It does not place the deep root either: 1,600 stations put a sixty-kilometre root within a factor of 1.5 of its depth in fewer than one survey in five. With the background field taken away, a hundred stations place it every time. What hides the deep root is not the reading but the geoid's own mass that the range does not explain, and either half of its spectrum is enough to do it. Fitted for depth, gravity reads the deep root as too heavy, where the loops read it as too light.