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

The thread: What survives a change of coordinates — page 2

Scale along the meridian and scale along the parallel depend on how the sphere was parameterised. The principal scales, the areal factor and the angular deformation do not, and only those are properties of the map itself. Essays 25 to 48 of 94.
A deflection of 10 arcseconds, and what it hides. The ellipsoid normal and the plumb line at one point, with the geoid tilted against the ellipsoid by 10 arcseconds — drawn 3000× steeper than life, because at true scale the two lines are indistinguishable. The relation is exact and linear: an arcsecond of deflection is the geoid rising 4.85 millimetres in a kilometre, so 10 arcseconds is 48.5 millimetres per kilometre. A star sight measures the plumb line's direction, so astronomic latitude differs from geodetic by exactly this angle — 309 metres of ground, at a point where the coordinate itself is correct. What the numbers refer to

The plumb line is not the normal

A latitude measured from the stars and a latitude that means a position on the ellipsoid are different angles, because a plumb bob hangs along gravity and gravity is not perpendicular to a mathematical surface. Ten arcseconds of difference is 309 metres of ground.

 The route at height does not lie above the route on the ground. London to Tokyo, solved at the surface and again at a stated height, with the two ground tracks compared point for point. At a cruising altitude of eleven kilometres the two part by 11.8 metres; the departure is proportional to the height, at a fitted slope of 0.997. On a sphere the same measurement returns 2.7e-9 metres, because the offset of a sphere is a sphere and the two geodesics coincide exactly. The offset of an ellipsoid is not an ellipsoid, and this is what that costs. Paths and directions

The shortest route is not at sea level

Ten rungs route on a surface and nothing is ever flown on one. The offset of a sphere is a sphere, so at altitude the great circle is the great circle. The offset of an ellipsoid is not an ellipsoid — its radii of curvature are M + h and N + h, which belong to no ellipsoid — so the shortest route at cruising height does not lie above the shortest route on the ground.

 Two conventions, and neither of them finds the blunder. A blunder of 350 mm added to leg 3 of a closed traverse, producing a misclosure of 350 mm — one part in 8344, which most specifications would accept. Bowditch's rule shares the misclosure out in proportion to leg length; the Transit rule shares it in proportion to each leg's component along the axis being corrected. Both close the figure exactly, so both are valid; they disagree with each other by up to 14 mm; and neither puts more than 104 mm of correction on the leg that is actually wrong. A rule for distributing a misclosure is a convention for producing consistent numbers, and it is not an instrument for finding errors. Grids, and what a survey does

The two ways to spread a misclosure

Bowditch's rule and the Transit rule take the same closed figure and the same misclosure and disagree about which legs were wrong. Both close it exactly, neither puts the correction on the leg that actually carries the blunder, and no measurement can settle which is right.

 The order the corrections go in, and what it costs. Setting out a 51.8 km line on the UTM zone 31N means turning a grid bearing into an azimuth to observe, and there are two corrections: the meridian convergence, 0.8669° here, and the arc-to-chord correction, 6.242″. Each bar carries the lateral offset it produces at the far end of the line, because a bearing error is a number nobody can picture and a sideways miss is the thing that misses. The exact arc-to-chord and the classical formula every manual gives differ by 0.0044″, which is 1.10 mm at the far end — small, real, and the reason the corrections have an order rather than a sum. Grids, and what a survey does

Setting out runs the chain backwards

Turning a design coordinate into something to observe on the ground means undoing the reduction chain, and undoing a chain reverses the order as well as the operations. Two of the corrections do not commute, and getting them the wrong way round misses by a millimetre at fifty kilometres.

 Every candidate fitted to one map's graticule, ranked by what is left over. The map is drawn in Conformal conic over a region 40° tall centred at 45° north, and the projection is not told to the fit. Each candidate is evaluated at the same 121 graticule crossings, its own parameters are searched, the best plane similarity between its output and the picture is removed, and what remains is drawn as a proportion of the map's own width on a logarithmic scale. Conformal conic fits to 1.3e-10, which is the arithmetic's floor; the next candidate is 3.7e+7 times worse. What is taught wrongly

A map does not say what it is

Every map on this site is one the site drew, from a projection it chose. Every map a reader has ever used is the other kind — a picture whose projection is a sentence in a corner, a legend, or nothing at all. The graticule is enough to recover it: fit every candidate to the crossings and rank what is left over.

 How large a map has to be before a wrong projection stops fitting it. Three rivals fitted to a Mercator graticule centred at 45° north, over regions from 1° to 70° of half-extent. The residual is the shape difference alone, with the best scale, rotation and offset removed, and both axes are logarithmic. The horizontal rule is a fifth of a per cent of the map's width — about the width of a drawn line on a printed sheet — and where a curve is below it, no measurement of that map can tell the two projections apart, however carefully it is made. What is taught wrongly

Two projections that cannot be told apart

Over a small enough region every projection is the same picture, so the question is how small. The answer is not one number: two conformal projections need twelve degrees of extent before their graticules can be separated, and two projections with different anisotropy separate below one.

 The same coordinate on four datums. One pair of numbers — 2.0° west, 54.5° north — read as a coordinate on OSGB36, ED50, NAD27 and on WGS84, and plotted where each reading puts the mark on the ground. The spread runs to 195 metres, and the height changes by 51, 44, 47 metres, which is the component nobody quotes. What the numbers refer to

The third coordinate moves too

A datum shift is quoted as a horizontal displacement because horizontal is what people look at. The transformation acts on a three-dimensional point, and its vertical component is between a quarter and a half of the horizontal one — 51 metres, for a British coordinate.

 Which projection wins, by the first derivative and by the second. Each column is a region, with the projections listed in the order Kavrayskiy's first-order criterion puts them in and the figure at the right of each row giving that projection's rank under the second-order criterion — flexion and skewness aggregated the same way. The rank correlations are Europe 0.83, the conterminous United States 0.81, the tropics 0.90, a cap of 30° radius 0.88, so the two orders agree broadly and disagree in detail. Where it matters is the winner: over a cap of 30° radius the choice moves from Albers equal-area conic to Lambert azimuthal equal-area, while Europe and the conterminous United States and the tropics keep theirs. A criterion that changed every answer would be suspect and one that changed none would be decoration. Measuring distortion

The second derivative over a region

Flexion has been measured at points and over the whole sphere, and never over a region — which is the only unit anybody chooses a projection for. Doing it finds that the second-order criterion moves the winner in one region of four, and that one projection in the library has no second derivative at all.

 Only one of a grid's five parameters changes the map. The same ground point written on the British National Grid and on UTM zone 31N, with the difference between the two coordinate pairs taken apart. The largest term by four orders of magnitude is where the two grids put zero — 5544 km, being a different central meridian, a different true origin and different false constants, all of which move every coordinate and no distance. The datum, which is the term everybody names, moves the ground 106 m. And the whole geometric difference between two transverse Mercators is their scale factors — 0.9996012717 against 0.9996 — which at this point is 50 cm. Four of a grid's five parameters are bookkeeping; the fifth is the map. Grids, and what a survey does

Two grids over the same ground

One point in the English Midlands is 406,788 east on the British grid and 167,478 east on UTM. Separating the difference properly leaves a surprise — only one of a grid's five parameters changes the map, and it is not any of the four that dominate the number.

 Ground north, on a map that has the pole on it. Every arrow points along its own meridian, towards the pole, and the pole is at the centre. Walking once anticlockwise round any loop enclosing it turns the arrow once anticlockwise as well: the index is 1, counted as a winding number with no distance anywhere in the calculation. A field like this cannot be combed flat. There is no way to choose a page direction for north at every point of the neighbourhood without the choice tearing somewhere, and the somewhere is the point in the middle. The impossibility

North cannot be up everywhere

Ground north is a field of arrows on the sphere, and a field of arrows on a sphere must vanish somewhere. The failure is not measured, it is counted: the indices of the zeros sum to two, obtained here as a winding number in seven different charts with no distance anywhere in the calculation, and it is the same two that Gauss–Bonnet gets by integrating curvature.

 The half-extent at which each rival stops fitting a Gall–Peters graticule. For each candidate, the size of region at which its best fit to a Gall–Peters map first leaves a residual of a fifth of a per cent of the map's width. Below that size the two are the same picture. The numbers are half-extents in degrees of latitude, at 20° north, with the plane affine transformation removed; a bar at 90° is a rival that never separates at all within the range searched. What is taught wrongly

What a careless copy hides

A photocopier that stretches one axis is a nuisance to remove before a projection can be identified. Removing it costs more than it looks: an affine fit absorbs the entire difference between the cylindrical equal-area projections, so Gall-Peters and Behrmann become the same picture at any size, to sixteen decimal places.

 A published coordinate is a definition being quoted. Re-observing a control point perfectly, with an instrument good to 20 mm, and comparing the answer to what is published for it. The published coordinate was fixed on a datum realisation that has since been superseded, which accounts for 106 m, and the ground it marks has moved 750 mm in 30 years at 25 mm a year. Both numbers are larger than the observation and neither is an error in it: subtracting a published coordinate from an observed one measures the interval between two definitions. Grids, and what a survey does

A published coordinate is a result

Re-observe a control mark perfectly, with an instrument good to twenty millimetres, and the answer disagrees with the published value by a hundred metres. Neither number is wrong. The difference measures the interval between two definitions.

 Every aspect of Mercator over Japan, and the line the old sweep searched. The regional distortion of Mercator over Japan for every position of the projection's pole — darker is better — with the meridian the site's one-dimensional sweep searches drawn on it. The sweep's best is a gain of 24.4× over the normal aspect; the two-parameter search finds 61.4×, which is 2.51 times better again, at a pole 45° of longitude away from anything the sweep could reach. The shortfall recorded when the sweep was written said this would happen for a region whose long axis runs diagonally, and this is the measurement of it. What each projection optimises

The aspect has three numbers, not one

The site's aspect search has swung the projection's axis through one plane for a long time, and recorded that a region whose long axis runs diagonally has its optimum somewhere that plane never reaches. Searching the whole sphere of pole positions finds 2.6 times more improvement over Japan and 3.4 over the conterminous United States.

 The circle a reprojection is about to turn into an ellipse. A circle drawn on the Mollweide plane, and its image under the map that carries that plane to Mercator — normalised so each pair has the same area, because the whole map can be rescaled and the shape is what is being shown. The dashed circle is what an undistorted reprojection would leave. This is Tissot's construction with a plane in place of the sphere, and it is the right picture for a reprojection because both ends are pictures. Worst angular deformation over the sampled points: 81.2°. Drawn on the source plane, in Mollweide. Measuring distortion

A projection between two projections

Every distortion measured on this site so far compares a map with the sphere. The operation a machine actually performs compares a map with another map — and that map has its own two principal scales, its own areal factor and its own angular deformation, none of which is the difference of the two it was built from.

 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 same map on four differently prepared pages. Mollweide at 30°E 20°N, then the same projection with a rotation and a magnification applied to the page, then with one axis stretched by 1.6, then with a shear of 0.5. The similarity changes nothing: flexion, skewness, ω and the anisotropy are identical to every printed figure, and only the last column — the same turning measured per unit of page arc rather than per unit of ground arc — moves, by exactly the magnification. The stretch and the shear change all of them, and flexion by 35 per cent. Measuring distortion

The second derivative is not an invariant

The first-order ladder established which quantities survive a change of coordinates and which are artefacts of the parameterisation. Asked of the second order, the answer is that flexion survives a rotation and a magnification of the page exactly, and survives nothing else: a stretch of 1.6 in one axis moves it by eleven per cent, a shear of 0.5 by thirty-five, and a shear of 3 leaves a ranking of eight world maps with a rank correlation of −0.07 to the one it started with.

 The set that can be reached is not the set that can reach. Two sets under a steady westerly: everywhere reachable from the marked place in a stated time, and everywhere from which the marked place can be reached in the same time. They have the same area to a fraction of a per cent — reversing a uniform flow is a reflection — and they overlap on only 32.3 per cent of their union. 67.7 per cent of the ground in one of them is not in the other. Paths and directions

The set that can be reached is not the set that can reach

The moment a cost stops being symmetric, two questions that read alike stop having the same answer. Under a flow at 45 per cent of a vehicle's own speed the set reachable from a place and the set from which the place is reachable have the same area to five significant figures and share 32 per cent of their union — so 68 per cent of the ground in one of them is not in the other.

 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.

 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.

 An equal-area map nobody would publish. Mollweide, with a row-dependent horizontal displacement applied to the page afterwards. That plane map has Jacobian determinant 1 everywhere, so every areal scale factor is untouched: the worst departure from 1 anywhere sampled here is 6.0e-12, which is the arithmetic's own floor. It satisfies the equal-area condition exactly and completely, and it is a ruin. The angular deformation at 30°E 20°N has gone from 11.0° to 60.5°. What each projection optimises

Every equal-area map is every other one

Take Mollweide and slide every row of the page sideways by an amount that depends on the row. The result satisfies the equal-area condition to 6 × 10⁻¹², exactly as well as Mollweide does, and it is a ruin — the angular deformation at one ordinary point has gone from 11° to 60°. Equal-area is one equation, and one equation leaves a whole function free.

 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.

 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.

 The error of a spherical formula is twice the flattening. The worst angular deformation of the spherical Mercator formulae applied to each body's own latitudes, against that body's flattening, on logarithmic axes. The points are measured by differencing the projection; the line is 2f radians, which is not fitted. The two agree to a third of a per cent for Mercury, the Earth and Mars, and depart by 3.3 and 5.1 per cent for Jupiter and Saturn, whose flattenings are too large for the first term to be the whole story. The site's headline number — 0.3848° on Earth — is an instance of this law rather than a fact about Web Mercator. What the numbers refer to

The same projection on a different body

A projection's distortion does not depend on the body's size at all — only on its flattening — so Web Mercator's 0.3848° of angular deformation is not a fact about Web Mercator. It is 2f radians, and the same mistake made on Mars measures 0.6765°, on Jupiter 7.68°, and on a body scaled ten times larger than Mars the identical number to twelve figures.

 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.

All threads