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

The thread: A theorem, not a limitation — page 2

No map is faithful, and this is not a shortcoming awaiting a cleverer cartographer. Gaussian curvature is intrinsic, a sphere has some and a plane has none, and that settles it. Essays 25 to 48 of 74.
The map that is continuous, and the pair it pays with. The orthographic is defined and continuous at every place on the Earth — it is written in the components of the place itself, with no longitude in it to jump. What it gives up is being one to one, and it gives it up almost everywhere: 47 per cent of the sphere shares its page point with the place directly behind it. Borsuk–Ulam guarantees at least one ANTIPODAL pair among those, and here it is exactly one — the centre and the place on the far side of the world, both at the middle of the picture, found to a residual of 1.5e-14. The impossibility

Two opposite places on the same spot

A projection may be continuous everywhere or one to one everywhere, and the first two rungs price both. What neither says is that the choice is not symmetric: a map that keeps continuity does not lose injectivity somewhere arbitrary. It loses it, always and at minimum, on a pair of places directly opposite each other on the Earth.

 How badly two arcs determine the flattening. The reciprocal flattening recovered by inverting two measured degree lengths, at 1.5° and 66.33°, against an error introduced into the equatorial one. The exact pair returns 298.26. Ten metres of error — 90 parts per million of a 110-kilometre arc — returns 301.5, and the relative error in the flattening is 118 times the relative error in the arc. At 1000 metres the inversion returns a negative flattening: an Earth longer through the poles than across the equator, which is the answer the Paris Observatory defended for a generation. What the numbers refer to

The figure of the Earth was measured

Two expeditions went to Lapland and Peru to measure the length of a degree of latitude, and the whole signal separating a flattened Earth from a round one is a kilometre in a hundred and eleven. Inverting two arcs amplifies their error by 118 — and a kilometre of error returns a lemon-shaped planet.

 five planes a dataset might be stored in, scored on three operations. Each candidate measured over -10° to 30° east and 35° to 60° north: the worst areal error, the worst angular deformation, and the spread of the scale factor, which are what an area query, a shape and a distance respectively depend on. The best plane for areas is Gall–Peters, for shapes Lambert conformal conic, and for distances Lambert conformal conic — three different answers, and no fourth candidate would collapse them, because a projection exact in two of these columns has a = b = 1 everywhere and is the isometry Gauss's theorem forbids. area of a polygon costs 3.06× too large in the wrong plane; drawing a line between two points costs 194 km from the ground it claims. What a machine does with it

The operation decides the coordinate system

Five candidate planes over one region, scored on the three things a spatial operation depends on. The conformal conic wins shape and distance and is 11.7 per cent out on area; the equal-area member is exact on area and 38.9° out on shape. No candidate is exact in two columns, and no candidate ever will be, because one that was would be an isometry.

 The world after a map of degree 2. The graticule of the sphere, sent through the square of the stereographic coordinate and then drawn in Mollweide. Every parallel is still a closed curve and every meridian still runs pole to pole, and the whole world has been wrapped round the sphere 2 times: the 2 meridians that used to be 180° apart now lie on top of one another. Nothing has been torn. The degree measured by integrating the area the map sweeps is 2.0004. The impossibility

How many times, not whether

Three rungs of this ladder answer yes or no and have no other kind of answer. The degree is the first quantity here that counts: a continuous map of the sphere to itself covers it a whole number of times, injectivity forces that number to ±1, and the number is recoverable three ways — by counting preimages, by integrating swept area, and from the rate at which the preimages coalesce.

 Everywhere Albers is exactly right, and the band round it. The set on which both principal scale factors are one — the only ground where a ruler on this map, at the map's own stated scale, measures the true distance in every direction. It is the parallels at 20.000° and 60.000°, drawn as a curve, with the band within 0.01 of true scale shaded round it. That band is 2.673 per cent of the sphere, and it narrows as ε as the tolerance tightens. The curve at its centre has no width at all, and no tolerance makes it have one. The impossibility

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.

 The boundary of the region the series is the map in. The curve where the transverse coordinate reaches 2.918, which is where the terms stop shrinking. It crosses the equator 83.81° from the central meridian and closes towards the poles, because the same longitude is a smaller transverse coordinate at a higher latitude — the boundary is a curve rather than a meridian. The narrow band beside it is a 3° zone, the width national grids actually use, drawn to the same scale: the practical world sits in about a fiftieth of what the series can reach. Drawn in Mollweide. The families

Where the series stops being the map

The transverse Mercator has no closed form on an ellipsoid, so every national grid computes a truncated series. Asking how many terms it needs has an answer everywhere; asking whether more terms always help has an answer only within 83.81° of the central meridian, and the boundary is computed rather than assumed.

 How thinly a sphere can be covered by a few equal caps. The covering density of the best arrangement of n equal caps found for each n — the total area of the caps divided by the sphere's, so a value of one would be a perfect tiling with no overlap. The horizontal line is 2π/√27 = 1.2092, the thinnest covering density of the PLANE by equal discs, which this site has used for the sphere since its first atlas essay. It is wrong in both directions: at 2 caps the sphere is covered more thinly than any plane can be, because a cap may be a hemisphere, and at every count from 3 upwards more thickly — 1.5092 at 3, and 1.3377 at 14. The ringed points are the four counts whose optimum is proved: 2 at 90.00°, 4 at 70.53°, 6 at 54.74°, 12 at 37.38°. Everything else is an upper bound from a search, drawn as one, and the bound loosens as the count rises — the search reaches the proved optimum to 3.4 per cent at these counts and has no such check anywhere else. What each projection optimises

The sphere is not the plane at small counts

The site's atlas arithmetic multiplies an ideal sheet count by 2π/√27, the thinnest covering density of the plane. At the four counts whose optimal covering of the sphere is a theorem the plane's number is 21 per cent high at two caps and 9, 5 and 2 per cent low at four, six and twelve — wrong in both directions, and the direction changes with the count.

 The cut makes 20 faces out of 14 regions and needs no more colours. The same partition on a sheet cut at the antimeridian. six of the 14 regions are drawn in two pieces, one against each edge, and they are shown darker. The sheet has 20 faces where the globe had 14 regions, and it needs exactly the same four colours — because the two pieces of a split region between them touch exactly what the region touched, so identifying them gives back the sphere's own graph, edge for edge. The impossibility

Four colours, and what a cut cannot do to them

Every projection removes a set, and a map cut at the antimeridian draws six of its fourteen countries in two pieces — twenty faces where the globe had fourteen regions. The obvious guess is that a map with split countries is the exclave problem and needs a fifth colour. It needs exactly four, and the reason is that the cut adds faces and adds no edges.

 Where a ridge, a valley and the pass between them curves the other way. The Gaussian curvature of a stated terrain over a 80-kilometre window, with the sign shown by the colour and the size by the ink. Positive on the summits and in the hollows, negative everywhere between — which is most of it: 79 per cent of the curved area. The extremes are 2.2e+4 times the Earth's own curvature, which is the quantity twelve rungs of this ladder have taken to be the curvature of the thing being mapped. The impossibility

Where the surface curves the other way

Twelve rungs argue the impossibility 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.

 The signal, and four instruments' noise. The spherical excess of an equilateral triangle at 45° north against its side, with the standard deviation of a measured excess — σ√3 — ruled for four instrument accuracies. A fifty-kilometre triangle, which is about the largest anybody routinely observed, has an excess of 5.49 seconds of arc. A theodolite reading to one second gives that excess a standard deviation of 1.73 seconds, so the measurement carries about three significant bits. Everything in this rung follows from that ratio. The impossibility

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.

 The equator, with its ellipticity exaggerated forty thousand times. The dashed circle is the equator every projection formula on this site assumes. The solid curve is the equator satellite geodesy reports, drawn with its departure multiplied by 40,000 so that seventy metres on a six-thousand-kilometre radius can be seen at all. The long axis is at 14.9° west and the short one ninety degrees from it, and the difference between them is 70.0 metres — a real quantity, about the height of a twenty-storey building, on a body every geodetic computation treats as a surface of revolution. What is taught wrongly

The equator is not a circle either

Eleven rungs price what pretending the Earth is a sphere costs, and every one of them replaces the sphere with a surface of revolution — a body whose equator is a circle. It is not. The two equatorial radii differ by seventy metres, the two surfaces part by thirty-five, and the auxiliary latitudes every ellipsoidal formula is written in stop existing.

 One construction, one number. A ray from a point on the equatorial plane, through the sphere, onto a tangent cylinder. Where the centre sits is the whole of the family: on the axis it gives tan φ, at the far side of the sphere 2 tan(φ/2), and at infinity sin φ. The same expression with angular distance in place of latitude, and a tangent plane in place of a cylinder, gives the gnomonic, the stereographic and the orthographic. The surface decides whether the answer is read as a height or as a radius and nothing else. The families

The developable surface was never necessary

Eight essays on this ladder start from cylinders, cones and planes, and none of them has asked which named projection is actually a projection onto one. Fitting a one-parameter perspective construction to eleven of them: six come back exact, and the three landmarks are the gnomonic at h = 0, the stereographic at h = 1 and the orthographic at h = ∞.

 The whole sphere, in two sheets. Two stereographic charts, one centred on each pole, each carried to 100° from its own centre. Two caps cover a sphere exactly when each reaches 90°, so this is the minimal atlas with a little overlap, and the heavy circle in each is the equator — the one curve both sheets contain. Nothing smaller works: one chart cannot cover the sphere at all, which is what this field's first rung proves. What the counting also fixes is a price: the worst point of any two-chart atlas is at 90° from a centre, where a conformal chart's areal factor is exactly 6 and an equal-area one's angular deformation is 49.07°. The impossibility

Two charts are enough, and one is not

The topological minimum for an atlas of the sphere is two sheets, and the counting fixes a price nobody chose: the worst point of any two-chart atlas is 90° from a chart's centre, where a conformal chart's areal factor is exactly 4 and an equal-area one's angular deformation is 38.94°. A national series has a hundred and twenty thousand sheets, and a hundred and twenty thousand minus two of them are bought by accuracy.

 On a triaxial body, latitude depends on longitude. Walk round each body at a constant planetocentric latitude of 45° and watch the direction of the surface normal, which is what the planetographic latitude is. On Mars it does not move at all — that is what having an axis of revolution means. On Vesta it swings by 1.40° and on Phobos it swings by 6.40°. A body without an axis has no latitude that is a function of position alone, and every coordinate on it is a convention with a body-fixed frame attached. What the numbers refer to

A body that is not an ellipsoid

Vesta's three axes are 286.3, 278.6 and 223.2 kilometres, all different, so it has no axis of revolution — and on such a body the planetographic latitude of a point at 45° planetocentric swings by 1.4° as one walks round it in longitude, and by 6.4° on Phobos. Latitude stops being a function of position.

 The indicatrix is a limit, and here it is being taken. The axis ratio of the image of a circle of radius ρ, measured from the picture rather than computed from the derivatives, against the ratio the derivatives give. It converges, and it converges as ρ² — each halving of the radius quarters the departure. At the smallest radius drawn the two agree to 7.6e-4 relative. This is what "the indicatrix is a limit" means when it is working: there is a number for the ratio to settle on, and it settles. Measuring distortion

The indicatrix at a point that has none

Ten essays on this ladder take the derivative for granted. Rung three proved the indicatrix is a limit and every figure since has assumed the limit exists. There are points on the maps this collection draws where it does not, and they are not exotic: the horizon of a gnomonic map, and every corner of every polyhedral net.

 A hexagonal tiling of the sphere, and its pentagons. 362 cells — 350 hexagons and 12 pentagons, the pentagons marked — drawn on Orthographic. The twelve are not a defect of the construction and cannot be removed by subdividing further: Euler's formula requires exactly twelve however many hexagons there are. Each pentagon here has 0.52 times the area of an average hexagon, so a count aggregated over these cells has twelve entries that mean something different from all the others. What a machine does with it

Hexagons cannot tile the sphere

Hexagons are the best cell shape a plane offers and the sphere will not take them. Euler's formula forces exactly twelve pentagons into any such tiling — twelve at 42 cells and twelve at 642, while the hexagon count rises twenty-one-fold — and each of the twelve is measurably smaller than the hexagons around it.

 What a cut buys. The mean angular deformation of the interrupted sinusoidal against the total length of cut the interruption spends, for lobe counts from one to twenty-four. Goode's interruption — the one actually printed — is the marked point: it spends 100 thousand kilometres and returns 18.0°, where the even-lobed curve returns 9.2° for the same length. It is not on the frontier and it was never trying to be: its cuts are placed to keep continents whole. The impossibility

What a cut buys

Six rungs count cuts and none measures one. A cut is a curve on the sphere with a length in kilometres, the shape distortion it removes is a falling function of that length, and the interruption everybody prints spends a hundred thousand kilometres to reach a figure the even-lobed curve reaches with sixty.

 The set a reach map shows, drawn from eight bearings. A geodesic disc of 4,000 km and the polygon a fan of eight bearings draws round it, on an equal-area azimuthal page centred on the disc so that the shaded ground is proportional to the ground it stands for. Every vertex of the polygon is on the true boundary and every edge between two of them is a chord, so the drawn set is inside the true one — always, at every count, for any convex reach set. The area it misses is 7.53% of 48,635,855 km², and it is not an error that care removes. It is what a finite fan is. Paths and directions

Every reach set ever drawn is too small

An isochrone is drawn by walking out along a finite number of bearings and joining the points, so its vertices are on the true boundary and its edges are chords — which puts the drawn set inside the true one, always, at every count, for any convex reach set. The deficit falls as the square of the count, and a spherical cap loses less than a circle by exactly cos t (1 + cos t)/2.

 What is left after the best rigid motion of the page. Every projection in the library, rotated about its own symmetry axis by five degrees, with the best rigid motion of the page fitted and the leftover measured against the picture's own size — on a logarithmic scale, because the answers span four orders of magnitude. Fourteen sit at 2e-6 or below, which is the axis search's own floor. Seven sit between 9e-3 and 3e-2. There is nothing in between, so the split is a fact rather than a threshold — and the fourteen are exactly the cylinders, the cones and the planes. The families

The family is a symmetry, not a shape

Rung seven dissolves the taxonomy: eleven named maps fitted to one perspective formula, six reproduced exactly and five refused, so the developable surface describes how the projections were discovered rather than what they are. What is left is the question it does not ask. If the shapes are not the classification, what is?

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

All threads