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

The thread: Computed, not quoted — page 13

Scale factors, areal ratios, angular deformations, geodesic distances and the areas of countries are all computed from the projection's own formulae. None is a number recalled from a table. Essays 289 to 312 of 383.
One degenerate zero, nudged, becomes two ordinary ones. The direction of steepest ascent within twelve degrees of the north pole, for the sectoral harmonic alone and with two amounts of the tesseral added. On the left is one zero of index −2, a monkey saddle: three ways up and three ways down, and a Hessian that vanishes. On the right are two ordinary saddles of index −1 each, both of which the second-derivative test names correctly. Nothing has been added to the field but a term whose size can be made as small as anyone likes, and the classification changes at every nonzero value of it while the total does not change at all. Measuring distortion

The second derivative cannot classify

Seven essays have used a second derivative to measure a size. The one thing a second derivative is classically used to do is say what KIND of thing is at a point, and on a sphere that use fails: the determinant test totals six where the truth is two, its failure is confined to exactly the field it is asked about, and the count that gets it right never differentiates twice.

 Five readerships, four winners, one library. The best projection under each stated readership, with the share of the sphere carrying half that readership's weight. The criterion is Kavrayskiy's throughout, every map is in its normal aspect, and the library is the same twenty. Four different projections win. The flat weighting at the top is the one every earlier comparison used, and naming it as a readership rather than as the absence of one is the whole of what this changes: it is the assumption that everybody who will ever read the map is spread evenly over the globe. What is taught wrongly

The area weighting was a readership all along

Twelve measurements have taken a projection comparison apart and found the comparer's own freedom in every part of it. All twelve rested on one thing none of them examined: that a square kilometre of empty ocean counts exactly as much as a square kilometre of city. That is not the absence of an assumption about the reader — it is the assumption that everybody who will ever look at the map is spread evenly over the globe. Named as one readership among five, it produces a different winner from three of the other four, and against a North Atlantic readership its choice is fifth of twenty and 33 per cent worse.

 The second clause moves the map without moving what the first clause measures. The plateau the tie-break changes most, drawn before and after. The contours are where the scale departs from true by the stated half a per cent, so the ground between them is the ground the specification asks to be kept. The rule leaves that ground alone — 52.23 per cent of the square before and 52.54 after — and spends its freedom outside it, where the worst departure falls from 27.16 per cent to 23.77. Of the 42 plateaux this is the largest change any of them shows. What each projection optimises

A second clause decides the half that was already decided

A specification written as a band admits forty-two maps keeping between 37.0 and 67.5 per cent of a region. Adding a tie-break — among those, take the one whose worst departure is least — is a linear programme, and it works: it makes each of the forty-two definite. It also merges three neighbours at the bottom into one, leaves 29.1 of the 30.5 points of spread in area kept, and names a single map only at the tolerance where every map keeps everything and the first clause has stopped asking for anything at all.

 Weighted by their residuals, six sights hand the low one six times its share. Six bodies seen from one ship: five between 44° and 61° up between east-north-east and east-south-east, and one 5° up due south, alone in its direction. Along each bearing, two bars: the share of the fix's weight the sight's altitude earns it, and the median share it ends with when every sight is weighted by its own residual and the fit is repeated until the weights settle. The low sight earns 4.0% and ends with 25.0%; the five good ones earn about 19% each and end with 1.8% to 3.1%. Bar length goes as the square root of the share. Paths and directions

Weighted by what it disagrees with, the fix trusts the sight it leans on

With six sights and two unknowns, the residuals seem to offer a way to find the bad sight without knowing the weather: weight each line by how little it disagrees, and solve again. One step of that gives a low body almost exactly the weight its altitude would, 4.5 per cent against 4.0. Every further step walks it away. Iterated until the weights settle, the fit is worse than weighting nothing in all four arrangements tried. Where the low body stands alone in its direction it ends with six times the weight it earns, because the fix leans on its line and its residual shows only 46 per cent of its error.

 Moved five centimetres, one station of three looks like all three, and one of five looks like itself. The local cluster at the centre, tied to three control stations (left) and to five (right) ten kilometres away, drawn on their true bearings with the distance shortened. The northern station, filled, has been moved 50 mm along its tie and nothing else is wrong. The bar at each station is the expected value of its own test for a displacement along its tie, noise-free. With three stations the three tests read 3.25, 3.22, 3.22: the data say only that the triangle is too large, and any of its corners could have made it so. With five, the moved station reads 4.31 and no other more than 2.44. Grids, and what a survey does

Naming the control station that moved takes a fifth

A local survey tied to distant control can tell that a monument has moved, and with three control stations it cannot say which. Each station gives the local lines one number they know well — its distance — and a shift of the whole control uses up two of them, so three stations leave one and four leave two. Five evenly spaced name a station moved five centimetres 83 times in a hundred; three name it 20. Better lines cannot stand in for the missing stations, and every station added also exposes more of the control's own published error.

 The geoid's curvature at a point has no limit; averaged over a triangle it settles. Dashed: the curvature a geoid model contains at a point, as a fraction of the sphere's own, rising in proportion to the degree the model stops at — from 0.36 per cent at degree 360 to 36 per cent at 36,000. Solid: the geoid's contribution to the mean curvature over equilateral triangles of 1, 10, 50 and 100 km, the rms of the anomaly in each one's spherical excess divided by that excess. Each rises while the model is coarser than the triangle and settles once it is finer: the 50 km triangle reads 0.64 per cent at EGM2008's degree 2190 and 0.68 per cent at 36,000; the 1 km triangle 2.19 per cent and 27 per cent. The impossibility

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.

 One velocity field, three frames. a transform boundary, drawn three times. The ground is the same ground and the arrows are not the same arrows: the fastest velocity anywhere in the 3 panels is 70.6 mm/yr and in the quietest panel the same places are nearly still. A frame is a choice of which rotation to subtract, and there is no measurement that picks one. Every panel has the same strain rate at every point. What the numbers refer to

A velocity needs a frame and a strain rate does not

One place on a plate boundary moves at 5.3, 7.0, 10.2 or 54.6 millimetres a year, and towards the south-east or the north-west, depending on which rotation was subtracted first. Every one of those readings reports the same strain rate, to two parts in a hundred thousand million.

 A 900 km circular accuracy at 55° north, projected. Six thousand ground positions drawn from a circular error of 900 kilometres about one place, each projected in Mercator and plotted as a displacement from the projected place. The curve is the nominal 95 per cent ellipse, computed the standard way — the ground covariance sandwiched between the projection's own derivatives. It holds 93.83 per cent of the points, the cloud is measurably longer than it along its own long axis by 5.52 per cent, and it is not symmetric: the third moment along the page's second axis is 0.727 rather than zero. Measuring distortion

The error ellipse is not an ellipse

A positional covariance pushed through a projection is the same matrix sandwich that draws an indicatrix. That is a first-order operation on a map with a second derivative, so the propagated distribution is not the ellipse the sandwich draws — and a nominal 95 per cent ellipse holds 93.06 per cent on one projection and 95.63 on another, in opposite directions, from the same input.

 Töpfer's square root is one line of a family. The fraction of features surviving to a smaller scale, for four stated populations whose size distributions differ only in their exponent. Every one is a straight line on these axes, and the slope of each is its own exponent: 0.3, 0.5, 0.8, 1.2. Töpfer's radical law is the line at 0.5 — the square root — and it is exact for that population and for no other. The law is not a rule of thumb with exceptions; it is a theorem with a hypothesis nobody states. What a machine does with it

How many features a scale can carry

Töpfer's radical law is quoted everywhere as a rule of thumb. It is not one: it is a theorem about a size distribution with a Pareto exponent of exactly one half, exact to 1.8 per cent for that population and out by 99.4 per cent for a lognormal one.

 The same copied stretch, dropped in rigidly and eased into place. One coast drawn twice. In the first ink the copied stretch is moved as a rigid, scaled piece and meets the rest of the coast at two corners — the dots. In the second it is pinned at the same two points and then eased along 30 per cent of the outline either side of each of them, which is what a compiler fitting a sheet by eye does. The dashed line is the coast the graticule predicts. The eased version departs from it by 6.1 thousandths of the map's width against the rigid one's 9.4: easing moves the departure about, and removes very little of it. What is taught wrongly

A copy eased into place loses its seams before its source

A stretch of coast lifted from another sheet and dropped in rigidly leaves two sharp corners where it joins, and both of them are findable. A compiler does not work that way: they pin the ends and ease the middle until it looks continuous. Easing halves the corner within five per cent of the outline and the seams survive it — until forty per cent, where the located seam jumps from four per cent of the coast out to twenty. The source projection survives twice as far, to seventy-five. The piece goes on naming where it came from after the method has lost track of which piece it is.

 A week of twilights learns the refraction share, and one twilight learns almost nothing. The share of the refraction correction that is uncertain, estimated from the residuals of equal-weight fixes pooled over one to fifty-six twilights, each residual corrected exactly for its own fix's geometry; the truth is a tenth. Shaded: the middle eighty per cent of 1,500 seeded weeks for a navigator who always takes one body between 3° and 8°, with its median solid. Dashed: the median for one who takes six bodies anywhere between 4° and 70°. After one twilight the first navigator's middle eighty per cent runs from 0.000 to 0.181; after fourteen, from 0.055 to 0.131; after fifty-six, 0.079 to 0.116. The medians climb to the truth from below: 0.049 and 0.020 after one twilight, 0.092 and 0.088 after fourteen. Paths and directions

A week of twilights learns what a sight is worth

One fix cannot tell how good its low sight was, but every residual of every fix is a point on one straight line whose slope is the square of the refraction share, once each is corrected exactly for its own fix's geometry. After one twilight the estimate is zero four times in ten; after a week it is within half again of the truth nearly four times in five. And the lesson is worth little: a guess within a factor of two already costs under 4 per cent of the fix, a week's estimate 1.3, and a share that changes from night to night by half again costs more than the learning buys.

 Three exponents, three maps, and each is the only answer its specification has. The conformal maps of a 25° spherical square that minimise the mean of |ln k| raised to three exponents. The heavy contours are where the scale departs from true by half a per cent either way, so the ground between them is what a surveyor asking for that band would keep. At p = 1, the mean departure, the map keeps 52.8 per cent of the square inside the band; at p = 2, the mean square, 44.2; at p = 32, which is within a per cent of the least worst case, 32.7. Its worst departure falls the other way, from 3.25 per cent to 1.94 and 1.48. For every exponent from one upward the specification is convex and has one answer. What each projection optimises

One exponent names one map, and at tight bands a better one than the band usually finds

A specification written as a band keeps a count of area and throws the rest of the scale field away, which is why it had forty-two answers and why a tie-break could not name one. Written instead as the mean of |ln k| raised to a stated power, it is convex for every power from one up, and has one answer. At a band of a tenth of a per cent that single answer keeps more of the region than forty-one of the band's forty-two, and at half a per cent fewer than nine of them: the band's best answer leads it by 14.7 points there, and the band's own search started from it reaches within two points of that best. Only as the band approaches the least worst case does a large power take over.

 Where on the land the homolosine beats the sinusoidal, read from Goode's own meridians. The land of the world outside Antarctica on a plain latitude–longitude grid, in two-degree cells, each shaded by how much less angular deformation Goode's homolosine gives it than the plain sinusoidal does, both cut into Goode's lobes and each point read from its own lobe's central meridian (dashed); solid lines are the cuts, and the dotted parallels are Goode's join at 40.7°. The key names the two inks: one where the homolosine wins, the other where the sinusoidal does, deeper for a larger difference. Weighted by land, the homolosine averages 16.51° and the sinusoidal 17.34°. Antarctica, drawn pale, is not in this score. The families

On the land it was drawn for, the homolosine wins by its meridians

Scored over the whole sphere and cut into Goode's lobes, the homolosine loses to the plain sinusoidal; for it to win on latitude alone, a reader would have to care about the band from 32° to 61° forty per cent more than its area. The land does not do that — the band holds 1.03 times its share of the continents. Weighted by land anyway, and each point read from the meridian of the lobe it lies in, the homolosine wins: 16.51° against Craster's 17.00 and the sinusoidal's 17.34. The win is in where Goode put his meridians, which lift his map from third to first; count Antarctica as land and it falls to fourth.

 The same two islands, and the cut that buys most is the central one's. A sea 60° across with a large island A, 12° across, and a small one B, 6° across, on opposite sides of its centre, drawn in the plane the stereographic makes of it. Each dashed line is one way of spending a single cut — from A to the open sea, from B to the open sea, or from A to B — and the solid line is the one that buys most, as a share of what two cuts buy. Left, A 18° from the centre and B 6°: A 9% · B 78% · between 21%. Right, A 6° and B 18°: A 81% · B 12% · between 11%. The better cut is the central island's in both, whichever island is large, and a cut joining the islands buys 21% and 11%. The impossibility

One cut belongs to the island that would cost most alone

A sea with two islands pays a few per cent for being drawn whole by an angle-keeping map, and one cut buys back part of it. Which island to cut is a design choice that leaves the ground exactly where it was, and it is not decided by size: across twenty arrangements of a large island and a small one, the cut worth most goes to the island that would cost the sea most if it were alone in it — in eighteen of twenty, the other two near-ties — which is usually the more central one. A cut joining the two islands buys almost nothing, and the better cut is nearly always the longer.

 The same resolution, the grid moved, and a different answer. The same field at a fixed 18 × 9 division, with the grid slid by fractions of a cell. Nothing is lost — every cell is the same size as before and there are exactly as many of them — and the largest reported value moves over a range of 12.59 per cent. That is more than a whole halving of the resolution costs, which is 10.15 per cent on the same field. The scale effect has an excuse and this one has none. What a machine does with it

The answer depends on the cells it was counted in

Nine essays price the cell as a shape. The number reported out of it is priced nowhere: sliding a grid without changing its resolution moves the largest reported value by 12.6 per cent, which is more than halving the resolution costs.

 How long a network has before it breaks its own tolerance. The years until the worst baseline in a 400-kilometre network exceeds five millimetres plus one part per million of its length, which is an ordinary first-order specification. A boundary zone breaks it in 16 years; a plate interior takes 1819; a rigid plate never does, at any speed, because a rigid body keeps every distance it has. Bars are clipped at five thousand years. What the numbers refer to

A grid stops fitting the ground it was laid on

A hundred-kilometre baseline across a plate boundary changes by 815 millimetres in fifty years, and the same baseline on the fastest plate in the model changes by nothing at all in the same fifty. The interval before an ordinary first-order specification is broken is six years in one place and never in the other.

 How aligned a region's ellipses are, for every projection and every region. The resultant length of the doubled indicatrix orientations, over 12 projections and 9 regions. One means every ellipse in the region points the same way; zero means they are spread evenly and cancel. Three cylindrical rows are 1.00 throughout, and everything else varies down the row and across it — which is the answer to the question the number was first stated without: alignment is a property of the pair. Mercator's row is the exception that is not a measurement, because a conformal projection's indicatrix is a circle and a circle has no orientation. Measuring distortion

Whether the ellipses point the same way

Alignment was found to decide whether the average of a region's deformations is above or below the deformation of its average, and stated it at ten projections over one region. Swept over a hundred and eight pairs, the answer is that alignment belongs to the projection 28 per cent, to the region 38, and to neither 33 — and two rows of the table turn out not to be measurements at all.

 A territory, and two enclosures somebody might score instead. A stated territory at 45° north — an ellipse twenty-eight degrees long and eight wide, its long axis bearing 45° — with its latitude–longitude bounding box and the smallest cap around it, on a globe. The territory fills 40.6 per cent of the box and 28.6 per cent of the cap. Scoring the library over each names a winner: an azimuthal for the territory itself, an azimuthal for its bounding box, an azimuthal for the smallest cap around it. The cost of working from the box rather than the territory, measured as the box's winner scored on the territory against the territory's own winner, is a factor of 1.0584. What is taught wrongly

The region was a rectangle in a projection

Every verdict this collection hands out is a verdict about a region, and almost every region it has been given is a latitude–longitude box. A box discards a territory's shape, which costs a few per cent, and it records the territory's width in degrees of longitude, which costs up to a factor of 1.72 and changes which family wins on four of forty stated territories. Convert that width to arc and the box gives the right answer every time — so the comparison had a projection in it before it began.

 The level is flat through the family, climbs over its last twentieth, and jumps at the cylinder. Each member's pass depth averaged over its 36 regions. From m = 0.2 to 0.9 it stays between 0.0224 and 0.0450 with no trend. From 0.95 it rises at every step — 0.0436, 0.0844, 0.0919, 0.1082, 0.1235, 0.1388 — a factor of 3.2 to the sinusoidal. And the cylinder at m = 0 stands at 0.2506, 8.5 times its nearest neighbour: a cylindrical map's pattern slides unchanged when it is turned about the Earth's axis, and no other member's does. What each projection optimises

The sinusoidal is the edge of its family, not outside it

The sinusoidal is the last member of a family of equal-area maps that begins at Lambert's cylindrical, and it was thought to be the one projection whose pass depth has no curve. Along the family the curve comes and goes: present at m = 0 and 0.8, absent at 0.6 and 0.9. What does move smoothly is the pass depth's level. It is flat from m = 0.2 to 0.9, then rises at every step over the last twentieth, 3.2-fold, to the sinusoid — whose high ridges are the end of that rise, not an exception to the family — while the cylinder at m = 0 stands eight times above its neighbour.

 The floor against where the streak is, and the stretch of it a crossing sweeps. The diversion floor for the New York–London chain with a streak 200 km/h faster than a 100 km/h jet core, against where along the jet the streak's centre lies, computed exactly on a grid of positions 125 km apart and read between them. With the streak far off the floor is the plain jet's, 624.7 km. With it over the Goose Bay half it rises by up to 41.1; over the Narsarsuaq half it falls by up to 44.8. The bar is the stretch a streak starting at -1400 km sweeps in a four-hour crossing at 250 km/h; the floor to be met is the worst on it, 666.0 km. The shaded band either side is a forecast position error of ±200 km at one standard deviation. Paths and directions

A forecast's error in where the streak is becomes a margin

A jet streak drifting along a gap moves the diversion floor by up to forty kilometres during a crossing, and an operator knows where the streak is only from a forecast. Planned to the worst over the forecast's own crossing window, the floor needs a margin of about eight kilometres for every hundred of error in the streak's position, and stops paying for itself against simply ignoring the streak near an error of two hundred and fifty. Planned to the departure analysis alone, it is worse than ignoring the streak at any error at all.

 Told the control has an error, the test must see a larger move before it names a station. The local cluster at the centre and its 5 control stations ten kilometres away, drawn on their true bearings with the distance shortened. The shaded ellipse at each station is its published error, 53 by 31 mm on average. Outward along each tie, at the same scale, the smallest move of that station its test finds four times in five at a size of 0.001: the thick bar for a test that carries the published error, 74, 79, 78, 78, 78 mm; the thin dashed bar for a test that holds the control exact, 48, 48, 49, 48, 48 mm. Grids, and what a survey does

Honest about its control, the test needs eight centimetres where it needed five

A test that holds the control exact reads the control's published error as movement, and at five stations flags a good survey sixteen times in a hundred. Carry the published covariance into the adjustment and the false alarms fall to half a per cent — and the smallest move the test can find grows from 48 millimetres to 77. A five-centimetre move is then named 29 times in a hundred instead of 63, the naming rate of perfect control takes twenty-four stations, and above ten centimetres the two tests agree. What the honest test buys is a flag that means what it says.

 The land wants the join at fifty-two degrees; Goode put it at forty-one. The homolosine rejoined at every latitude from 20° to the pole, the Mollweide cap rescaled so each parallel stays continuous, each composite cut into Goode's lobes at its own best proportions. Solid: mean angular deformation over the land outside Antarctica. It falls from 17.33° at 20° to its least, 16.29°, at a join of 51.7°, and rises again to the sinusoidal's 17.34° at the pole; Goode's join at 40.7° scores 16.51°, and every join sampled from 50° to 60° is within a tenth of a degree of the best. Dashed: with Antarctica counted as land, and dotted: over the whole sphere by area — both fall all the way to the pole, where there is no cap at all. The families

The land puts the homolosine's join eleven degrees higher

Goode joined the sinusoidal to the Mollweide at 40° 44′ because that is where their parallels have the same length — a fact of geometry, not of any objective. On the land his map was drawn for, read from his own lobes, the join has an objective at last, and its best value is 51.7°: a composite joined there gains a fifth of a degree over Goode's, and every join from about 46° to 60° does nearly as well. A smooth curve fitted to the land with no join in it at all stays within three per cent of flat to 50° and then closes, gaining twice as much again. Goode found the right shape and put its knee too low; with Antarctica counted, the land wants no knee at all.

 Round a triangle the geoid's deflection has a flux and no circulation. A fifty-kilometre triangle on a stated patch of geoid whose undulations follow Kaula's spectrum between 10 and 400 km, with the deflection of the vertical drawn as strokes down the geoid's slope. Beside each side, the deflection's component across it and along it, each integrated along the side, in metres: across −0.689, −0.538, +0.499; along −0.235, +0.275, −0.040. The sum across is −0.727 m, which over the Earth's radius is −0.0235″ of the triangle's excess. The sum along is +0.000003 m — the geoid's height carried round the loop and returned to where it started. The impossibility

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.

 Four cities, met — the triangular, x first construction. Every cell drawn here holds the same area of ground and a different area of page: the map has been constructed so that its areal scale factor is the density it was handed, cell by cell, over a contrast of 25.99 to one. The residual against that target is 5.1e-6, measured from the map's own derivatives rather than from the construction. What it cost is the shape: the redistribution alone reaches 139.1° of angular deformation and averages 70.4°, on top of whatever the equal-area projection under it was already doing. Measuring distortion

A map drawn to a density it was handed

Two hundred and twenty-six essays measure distortion after the fact. This one specifies it: a density is handed to a map as a boundary condition, the areal scale factor comes out equal to it to five parts in a million, and every other invariant the site owns becomes the price.

All threads