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

The thread: Computed, not quoted — page 6

Scale factors, areal ratios, angular deformations, geodesic distances and the areas of countries are all computed while the figure is drawn. None is a number recalled from a table. Essays 121 to 144 of 299.
The same ranking, with the right answer removed from the library. A map drawn in Mercator, fitted by every candidate except Mercator. Something still wins: Conformal conic, by a factor of 1.64 over the runner-up, leaving 0.4 per cent of the map's width unexplained. With Mercator in the library the winner's margin is 1.2e+13. The ranking always produces a name; what tells the two situations apart is how far ahead the name is. What is taught wrongly

When the answer is not in the library

Fitting twenty candidates to a map and ranking the residuals always produces a winner, which makes it a ceremony unless it can also produce a refusal. Held out of its own library, a Mercator map is named as a conformal conic, leaving 0.4 per cent of the map's width unexplained — and the quantity that tells the two situations apart is not the residual but the margin, which is 1.6 when the truth is absent and 10¹³ when it is present.

 A 1-hectare parcel across British National Grid, at 52°N. The departure of a plan's dimensions from the ground's, across the width of the zone, as a length and as an area. The area curve is the length curve doubled — an areal scale factor is the square of a linear one, and squaring a small departure doubles it — so a parcel whose sides are each 399 parts per million short on the central meridian is 797 short in area. On a 1-hectare parcel that is 8.0 square metres at the central meridian and 8.0 at 0.00° out. Grids, and what a survey does

An area on the grid is not an area on the ground

A grid's scale factor is a property of lengths and what a surveyor sells is an area. Squaring a departure doubles it, so a hectare drawn on the British grid at its central meridian has 10,008 square metres of ground under it — and correcting an area with the line factor instead of its square leaves half the error behind.

 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.

 What a 20 mm closure tolerance lets each station hide. A closed traverse of seven stations in plan, each labelled with the angle blunder that would leave the closure inside a 20 millimetre tolerance. An angle error at a station rotates everything downstream of it about that station, so the closing point moves by the distance from the station to the close — and the last station before the close stands 72 metres from it and can hide 57 arcseconds, against 2.1 at the worst-placed station. The check is not insensitive; it is unevenly sensitive, and nothing in the specification says so. Grids, and what a survey does

What a closed figure cannot see

A closed traverse imposes exactly two conditions on its observations, so everything else is free — and the freedom is not spread evenly. At a twenty-millimetre tolerance the worst-placed station in a seven-station loop hides an angle blunder of 2.1 arcseconds and the station standing seventy-two metres from the close hides 57, because a rotation about a point near the finish moves the finish hardly at all.

 Two explanations for one residual, against the size of the region. A map in the right projection whose control coordinates are on the wrong datum, and a map fitted with the wrong projection and the right datum, both measured as a residual after the reproduction's scale, rotation and offset have been removed. The datum shift's residual is flat: it is the same 1.3e-6 at every size, because a similarity fit is very nearly what a datum shift is and it absorbs the rest. The wrong projection's grows by three orders of magnitude with the region. They are the same number below about a degree, which is where a residual stops saying anything about either of them. What is taught wrongly

A residual has more than one explanation

The method names a projection by fitting every candidate to a set of control points and taking the smallest residual. It has never been asked what else a small residual could be. A map drawn in the right projection from coordinates on the wrong datum leaves a residual of one part in a million — indistinguishable from noise, at every region size, because a similarity fit absorbs a datum shift almost exactly.

 Where the middle of a 20° × 20° region is, in five planes. The region is drawn in longitude and latitude — which is itself a projection, and one of the ones being compared. Each filled mark is the shoelace centroid computed in one projected plane and inverted back to the ground; the hollow mark is the centre of area on the sphere, by integration. They spread over 273 kilometres. The equal-area member is 66 kilometres out, because a centroid is a first moment and preserving area says nothing about where the area sits. What a machine does with it

A centroid belongs to a plane

Every renderer labels a region at its centroid, and every centroid is a shoelace over coordinates as stored — which is a statement about the plane they are in. Six planes put the middle of one 20° × 20° region up to 273 kilometres apart, the equal-area member is 66 kilometres out, and the disagreement falls as the square of the region's size.

 One level surface, 1000 m up at the equator, in two height systems. A single equipotential surface — the shape a body of water takes — with the number each height system gives it, all the way from the equator to the pole. The orthometric height, which is the distance up the plumb line and therefore a length, falls by 5.28 metres along it, because level surfaces converge polewards. The dynamic height, which is the geopotential number divided by one constant gravity value, is flat to 0.000 millimetres — it is the same number everywhere on the surface, and it is not a distance from anything. What the numbers refer to

A height that is not a length

Level surfaces converge polewards, so the surface a lake sits on is 5.28 metres lower at the pole than at the equator and a height system that reports lengths says a lake runs downhill. The fix reports a number that is constant on the surface and is not a distance from anything: a hundred-metre climb raises it by 99.73 metres at the equator and 100.26 at the pole.

 What the 5th decimal place of a coordinate is worth on the ground. A latitude written to 5 decimal places steps 1.112 m north for one unit in its last digit, at every latitude, because the meridian does not care where it is measured. A longitude written to the same 5 places steps 1.112 m east on the equator and 0.097 m at 85°, because a degree of longitude is a degree of a circle whose radius is R cos φ. The same written precision means two different distances at the same point, and a different pair at every other. Measuring distortion

A coordinate is a number with a width

Every number on this site so far has been exact. A written coordinate is not: five decimal places of a degree is 1.112 metres of latitude everywhere and 1.112 metres of longitude only on the equator, falling to 0.097 at 85°. The same written precision carves the ground into a cell that is square in one place and eleven times longer than it is wide in another.

 Three solutions of one condition, all exactly equal-area. The pseudocylindrical ansatz is x = λ·C(φ) and y = Y(φ) — two unknown functions — and the equal-area condition is one equation, C·Y′ = cos φ. So Y may be chosen freely and C follows, and these three choices give three maps that are equal-area to 1.8e-11 and look nothing like one another: their pole lines are 10%, 100%, 19% of their own equators. That is why the cylindrical family has one equal-area member and this family has as many as anybody cares to name. The families

The condition does not always decide the map

Write a family as a shape with an unknown function in it and every classical property becomes a differential equation. In three families the equation has one solution and the named projection is what comes back. In the fourth it has a whole function of solutions, which is why that family has forty members and the others have three.

 Where the projection's pole should go, and the answer the third rotation moves it to. Every dot is a pole position the search tried, sized by the best score it can reach there when the third rotation is also free — the score is the distortion of Robinson over Europe by Kavrayskiy's criterion, so smaller is better and the large green dots are the good regions. The circled mark is the two-parameter optimum and the square is the three-parameter one: they are 74 pixels apart on this map, which is a different aspect rather than a refinement of the same one. The search costs 8 times the evaluations of the two-parameter one. Drawn in Mollweide. What each projection optimises

The third parameter, run

An aspect has three numbers and this site has been searching two of them, with a note admitting it. Searching all three is worth up to 2.1 times — and the obvious way to do it, starting from the two-parameter answer and letting the third move, finds a fraction of that or nothing at all.

 Two readings of the same triangle, and the band between them. The same three vertices, joined two ways: with straight lines in the plane the coordinates are stored in, and along the ground. Every dot is a point the two readings disagree about — inside on one and outside on the other. The band covers 29.5 per cent of the polygon, which is 4241 thousand square kilometres, and it is not an error in either reading: the file does not say which one it means. Densifying the stored boundary removes it, which is the only fix there is. Drawn in Equirectangular. What a machine does with it

Inside is a claim about the edges

Whether a point is inside a polygon is not a property of the point and the polygon. It is a property of the plane the edges were understood to be straight in, and between two readings of the same file there is a band of disagreement — 29 per cent of one triangle's area, 4.2 million square kilometres, and the file does not say which reading it means.

 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.

 One instrument, one covariance, drawn where Mollweide puts it. The same measurement is made at every point: 5 m east by 5 m north, uncorrelated, which on the ground is a circle. Each ellipse is that covariance pushed through the projection's own Jacobian and drawn 26,000 times life size. On Mollweide the axis ratio reaches 4.15, so an instrument that is equally good in every direction is drawn as though it were not. Measuring distortion

An error ellipse is an indicatrix

A positional covariance pushed through a projection is the same matrix sandwich that produces Tissot's indicatrix, so the error ellipse drawn on a map and the distortion ellipse drawn beside it are the same ellipse. A five-metre circular accuracy is drawn at an axis ratio of 3.04 on one common projection — and the same projection draws a genuinely lopsided 304 by 100 metre error as a perfect circle.

 The scale spread of every grid Britain could have adopted. A grid is conformal by requirement, so its angular deformation is zero everywhere and the whole design problem is the spread of its one remaining number: the largest scale factor over the region divided by the smallest, in parts per million. The grid's own scale factor does not enter — multiplying every scale by a constant leaves the ratio alone, which is why it is chosen last. The bottom bar is Chebyshev's optimum, the conformal map of this region whose scale is constant on its boundary, which no map of any family can beat; the adopted grid sits 1.98 times above it. Measured over a stated box rather than a coastline, because a coastline would put the vendor's generalisation into the answer. Grids, and what a survey does

The best grid a country could have had

A national grid is a conformal map chosen for one region, so its whole design problem is one number: the spread of its scale factor. That number has a theoretical floor, this site can now compute it, and the adopted grid turns out to be either exactly optimal or half as good again — depending entirely on which box the country is declared to be.

 The shortest route, and the shortest route a vehicle can fly. A leg of 60 kilometres for a vehicle whose minimum turning radius is 5, arriving on a heading 120° off the line and required to leave on one -60° off it. The straight line is the geodesic; the curve is the shortest curvature-bounded path, which is Dubins's RSR — a turn, a straight, a turn — at 67.29 kilometres against 60. The second curve is the runner-up word, drawn to show that the choice between them is a real one rather than a formality. Paths and directions

The shortest route a vehicle can fly

Nine rungs find the shortest path under a metric and none asks whether the thing travelling can follow it. Bound the curvature and the route depends on two headings as well as two positions: the turning cost is a fixed 1.81 kilometres whatever the leg length, so it is 18 per cent of a short leg and 0.28 per cent of a long one, and the whole of it vanishes when the vehicle happens to be pointing the right way.

 Every library projection over Europe, on the two axes it can be wrong on. Each dot is one projection, scored over Europe on the two independent failures: how much it turns angles and how much it changes areas. The lower-left corner is the isometry that does not exist. The line joins the five projections nothing beats on both counts — the rest are inside it, and a reader who prefers either failure to the other should still not choose one of them, whatever weighting they hold. What is taught wrongly

The projections that are beaten on both counts

Two rungs of this ladder scored a rule of thumb over thirty regions and then forty-five. The same populations answer a harder question the ladder has never put: which library members are never the right answer at all. Two are beaten outright on both criteria everywhere, one is on no regional front in any population — and it is on the world's.

 Two nets of the same solid, cut to the same length. Every net of a Platonic solid severs exactly the same number of edges, all of the same length, so the total length of the cut is a constant and cannot choose between them. Each line joins the two places a severed edge ends up. Left: the net that keeps them closest, 11.30 edge lengths in total. Right: the net that puts them furthest apart, 17.97 — a factor of 1.59 for the same amount of cutting. The families

The net that loses the fewest neighbours

Every one of the cube's 384 nets cuts exactly seven edges of exactly the same length, so the quantity this collection has been pricing cutting by is a constant that cannot choose between them. Measured on the reader's side — how far apart a net puts two places that touch on the globe — the best net scores 11.30 and the worst 17.97, for identical cutting.

 Two latitudes for one point on Mars. A cross-section of Mars with its flattening exaggerated 6× so the two angles can be told apart. The line to the centre defines the planetocentric latitude and the outward normal defines the planetographic one; at 45° they differ by 0.338° on the real body, which is 20 kilometres along the surface. Both numbers are published for Mars, and a coordinate that does not say which it is is ambiguous by that much. What the numbers refer to

A coordinate on another body

Mars publishes two latitudes for every point and they differ by up to 0.338°, which is twenty kilometres of ground — almost exactly the same distance as the Earth's own 0.192°, because Mars is smaller by nearly the same factor. The libraries that compute either have known both numbers since this collection's early essays and had never been pointed anywhere but here.

 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.

 Two routes to one grid distance, 76.7 kilometres apart. The first four bars are the tape's chain: the chord between two marks, the height difference taken off it, the reduction to the ellipsoid, and the projection's own scale applied. The last is the satellite route — project both marks and subtract — which needs none of those steps because the observation already contains the positions the chain exists to supply. They agree to 0.17 millimetres, and that agreement is what makes the chain checkable at all: two routes to one number, sharing no arithmetic. Grids, and what a survey does

The chain the satellite does not have

The four-step reduction from a tape reading to a grid coordinate exists because a tape does not know where it is. A satellite observation does, so the same distance can be got by projecting both ends and subtracting — and the two answers agreeing to a fifth of a millimetre is the first check the chain has ever had.

 Going out and coming back, at three orders. A point three degrees from the central meridian, taken forward into the projection and back again with the series truncated at the same order both ways, and the ground distance between where it started and where it returned. The second-order pair is out by a tenth of a metre at some latitudes; the third by half a millimetre; the fourth — the order every national grid formula in ordinary use is written to — by 0.39 mm. The dips are where one of the two series passes through a node, not where the map is better. The families

The inverse of the series is not the series of the inverse

Transverse Mercator on an ellipsoid has no closed form, so every national grid computes it as a truncated series. There are two of them — one out and one back — and they are separate approximations. Composing them does not give the identity: at the order every grid formula in ordinary use is written to, a point three degrees from the central meridian comes back 0.39 mm north of where it started.

 The same address length, a tenth of the area. Every cell of a lon/lat quadtree at level 4 carries an identifier of the same length. The heavy curve is each cell's area as a fraction of the largest, against its latitude: a polar cell is 10.2 times smaller than an equatorial one. The light curve is the inverse of the cell's aspect ratio, which falls from 1.00 near the equator to 0.10 at the top — the cells stop being anything like square long before they stop being usable. What a machine does with it

An address is an area

A cell identifier does not name a place, it names a region — so its precision is an area rather than a length. On the obvious lon/lat scheme that area varies by a factor of 10 at level 4 and 163 at level 8, and the factor doubles with every level: the same identifier length means less ground the further north it is used.

 One slice of the aspect objective, at the best γ. The Kavrayskiy score for Robinson over Japan, as the pole is moved over the whole sphere with the third rotation held at the value the search settled on. Dark is good. The marks are local minima of the full three-dimensional grid that happen to lie in this slice: there are 6 of them here and 58 in the cube, and a search that walks downhill from a random start reaches the best of them 7 per cent of the time. What each projection optimises

The landscape the search walks on

The three-parameter aspect search was run and its answer recorded with a note admitting nothing proved it global. Mapping the objective finds 26 to 34 local minima for every projection and region tried, a downhill walk from a random start reaching the best of them 6 to 35 per cent of the time — and one seed from the coarse grid the search already uses reaching it in all four cases. The score is reproducible to two per cent across a sevenfold refinement; the pole it names moves 60 degrees.

All threads