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

The thread: What survives a change of coordinates — page 3

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 49 to 72 of 115.
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?

 Three implementations of one projection, and three different distortions. The spread in angular deformation between linear, Catmull–Rom and Aitken interpolations of Robinson's own table, at 60° of longitude. It is exactly zero at every fifth degree, because all three pass through the tabulated rows, and it is not zero anywhere else: 37 of 87 latitudes differ by more than half a degree and the worst is 8.42°. The graticules the three draw differ by 4.2 parts per thousand of the map's own span, which is under the width of a printed line. The families

A projection defined by a table has an interpolation in it

One member of this library has no formula: Robinson set nineteen pairs of numbers by eye and the table is the definition. Three published interpolations of it draw graticules that differ by four parts in a thousand of the map's span and report angular deformations that differ by 8.4 degrees.

 OSGB36 then DHDN, done four ways. How far each route lands from the truth — applying the two transformations one after the other — at 54.5° north, 2.0° west. Composing them into one affine map is exact, because two affine maps compose into an affine map and nothing is dropped. Describing that composition with seven parameters again leaves 0.19 millimetres, because two linearised rotations compose into something with a symmetric part that seven numbers cannot hold. Adding the fourteen published numbers in pairs — which is what a chain is usually done with — leaves 7.4 millimetres. Logarithmic from a micrometre. What the numbers refer to

A chain of transformations does not close

Two datum transformations applied one after the other are not the sum of their fourteen published numbers. The gap is seven millimetres in Britain, doing the two in the other order moves the answer twenty, and the rotation matrix everybody prints is not a rotation.

 A parallel, and the places with the same northing as its middle. Both curves are drawn on a transverse Mercator zone 6° wide at 45° north. The upper one is the parallel — every place on it is at the same latitude — and it climbs 4379 metres of northing on the way to the zone edge. The lower one is the set of places whose northing equals the parallel's on the central meridian. Between them lies every pair the grid puts in the wrong order, and its widest point is 4.39 kilometres of latitude. Grids, and what a survey does

Further north on the grid is not further north

Thirteen rungs price a grid's origin, scale, units and zones, and every one treats a coordinate as a position. It is also an ordering, and the two disagree: a parallel climbs 4,379 metres of northing on its way to the edge of a UTM zone, so two places 4.4 kilometres apart in latitude can be listed in the wrong order — and the share of pairs it happens to is the convergence, in a different unit.

 A plane fit swallows a datum shift, and keeps swallowing it. A map of OSGB36's ground drawn as though it were on WGS84, at seven sheet sizes. The upper curve is how far the drawing moves — a real 99-metre error on the ground — and the lower one is what survives the best similarity between the two, which is what a fit for the projection removes for free. The absorption runs from 99.68 per cent on a 1° sheet to 85.16 on a 60° one, and what is left is 3.9 parts per million of the map's own size even then — two microns on a sheet half a metre across. What is taught wrongly

The datum hides inside the projection's parameters

Six essays recover a projection from control points with the body it was drawn on taken as known. It is not known, and the fit cannot find it: a 99-metre datum shift is absorbed to 99.7 per cent on a two-degree sheet and to 85 per cent on a hemisphere, leaving eleven parts per million of the map behind.

 Which rotation a projection cannot see is decided by the projection. The same rotation — 2.455 arcseconds, DHDN's polar one — applied about each of the three axes in turn, with the residual after the best plane fit drawn on a logarithmic scale. A cylindrical and a conic in their normal aspects hide the polar rotation to arithmetic noise, 3e+5 times better than either equatorial one, because a change of longitude is a symmetry of both. A pseudocylindrical hides none of them — its horizontal coordinate carries a factor in latitude, so a longitude shift is a shear rather than a translation. And an azimuthal centred on the equator hides the equatorial rotation instead. What is taught wrongly

A rotation is not absorbed the way a shift is

A datum's rotations were expected to be the part a plane fit could not swallow. They are the part it swallows best — 93 times better than the translations over a hemisphere, and 24 times better per metre moved — and the reason is that the rotation which matters is a change of longitude, which is a symmetry of the map.

 Four averages of one region's indicatrices — Robinson over the whole sphere. The faint ellipses are the indicatrix at ninety sampled places; the four drawn over them are four candidate averages of exactly that set. The arithmetic mean of the tensors gives semi-axes 1.1621 and 1.0182; the log-Euclidean mean gives 1.0053 and 0.9608; the Karcher mean gives 1.0042 and 0.9619; and taking the mean of a and the mean of b separately — which is what a published average distortion usually is — gives 1.2335 and 0.8200. Their maximum angular deformations are 7.57°, 2.60°, 2.47°, 23.23°, against a mean of the pointwise deformations of 20.67°. Five numbers, one set of ellipses. Measuring distortion

An average of ellipses is not an ellipse

Rung three integrates distortion over a region and finds the weighting is somebody's opinion. It never asked what was being averaged. An indicatrix is a positive-definite matrix, matrices form a cone rather than a vector space, and the arithmetic average of an equal-area map's indicatrices comes back inflating area by up to 11 per cent.

 A transformation is more certain in some places than others. The horizontal position uncertainty a Helmert transformation carries, from the stated widths of its own seven parameters, along three meridians. It runs from 40 mm to 68 mm — a factor of 1.71 — and it falls towards the poles, because the rotation terms act on the distance from the Earth's axis. A single figure quoted for "the accuracy of the transformation" is the value at some latitude nobody wrote down. What the numbers refer to

The seven parameters have their own uncertainty

Nine essays on this ladder print a datum transformation as seven exact numbers. Every published set is the output of a least-squares fit and arrives with standard errors as much a part of the result as the parameters — and pushing those widths through to the ground gives an ellipse, not a number, that is 68 mm across at the equator and 43 mm at 70°.

 Four radii of the Earth, and one that is a range. The four constants called the mean radius of the Earth, on a scale of kilometres, with the range of the local Gaussian radius √(MN) drawn behind them. Three of the four agree to about a part per million; the rectifying radius is 3560 metres smaller, which is 559 parts per million. The Gaussian radius spans twelve times that range on its own, which is why there is no such thing as the conformal sphere. The families

Four radii of the Earth

The ellipsoid is usually handled with an auxiliary latitude. Every such construction also needs a radius, and the radius that makes each property exact is a different number: the published 6371 km is right for an area to half a part per million and wrong for a meridian distance by 559 — while the radius a conformal map needs is not a constant at all, and spans 6,739.

 One sentence, three readings of it. "a straight line from the initial point on the Rio Grande to a point on the Colorado" — Treaty of Mesilla, 1853. Every curve here answers to those words. the geodesic, the rhumb line, straight on the sheet, drawn between the same two monuments on a conformal conic fitted to the segment itself. The widest pair, the geodesic against the rhumb line, are 7.53 kilometres apart at their worst and enclose 3,925 km². The shading is that ground. It is not an artefact of the drawing: the same figure of the 141st meridian shows one line, because on a meridian every one of these readings is the same curve. Grids, and what a survey does

One sentence, and the ground between its readings

Every land boundary in the world is defined by a sentence, and a sentence naming two monuments does not name a curve. "A straight line" between the Rio Grande and the Colorado admits at least three answers 7.53 kilometres apart at their worst; "the forty-ninth parallel" admits four, 96 kilometres apart, with 130,972 square kilometres between the extremes.

 The same patch, pinned six ways. Two vertices have to be held or the conformal energy has a similarity's worth of null space. Which two turns out to decide two of the three numbers reported. The median angular deformation is the same to 8 per cent across all six — that is the map. The areal spread runs from 2.68 to 7.44, so the 3.07 reported for this body was a statement about its corners. And pinning two adjacent vertices, which fixes the similarity through a very short lever, ruins the worst point without touching the median: a badly conditioned constraint pays for its scale in one corner. What the numbers refer to

The map depends on where it was cut

Solving the discrete conformal equations on a triangulated body gave an areal spread of 3.07, with the number possibly belonging to the patch, the boundary and the two pinned vertices rather than to the surface. It belongs to the pins: hold a different pair and it runs from 2.68 to 7.44, while the typical angular deformation does not move at all.

 The line a commission can actually run. A boundary described as a parallel of latitude and marked by monuments 220 kilometres apart, with the offset exaggerated 700 times so that it can be seen at all. A commission cannot run a parallel: it can set a monument, sight a straight line to the next and clear the trees between, and a straight line between two points of equal latitude is a geodesic, which passes POLEWARD of the parallel everywhere between them. So the marked line lies north of the described one, by 1176.5 metres at the middle of each of its 9 chords, and encloses 1611.2 square kilometres that the words put on the other side. At the 20-kilometre spacing used throughout, the same offset is 9.03 metres. Grids, and what a survey does

The line a commission can actually run

A boundary commission cannot run a parallel of latitude. It can sight a straight line between monuments, and a straight line between two points of equal latitude passes poleward of the parallel — by s² tan φ / 8R, which at a mile of spacing is fifty-eight millimetres and at a hundred kilometres is two hundred and twenty-six metres. The described line and the marked line are different curves, and the marked one governs.

 In a wind every circle moves upwind, and the route moves with them. New York to London with the sixty-minute allowance at a stated one-engine speed of 745 km/h. In still air every airfield's circle has a radius of 745 km, drawn faint and dashed. In a northerly of 150 km/h the places from which each airfield can be reached in sixty minutes form a circle of the same radius moved 150 km upwind, drawn solid. The dashed route is the shortest the still-air rule allows, 5,698 km; from one point of it the quickest diversion in this wind takes 68.7 minutes. The solid route stays inside the moved circles, 5,765 km, and its longest diversion takes 60.8 minutes — the sixty the moved circles stand for, to within what the Earth's curvature does to a wind that keeps one bearing. Paths and directions

A diversion allowance in a wind is the same circle, moved upwind

A diversion rule written in minutes is turned into a distance by assuming still air. In a uniform wind the places from which an airfield can be reached in sixty minutes are not a stretched region but the still-air circle moved upwind by the wind's run. A 150 km/h northerly makes the still-air route across the North Atlantic need a diversion of 68.7 minutes, a southerly makes it 54.0 — and the least radius at which the ocean can be crossed barely moves.

 What a geoid model leaves out, against the degree it stops at. The RMS of everything above the model's highest degree, from Kaula's rule — the statement that the normalised coefficients at degree n are about 10⁻⁵/n². The line is R × 10⁻⁵ ÷ n, so a model to degree 360 omits 17.7 centimetres and one to 2190 omits 2.9. Every orthometric height derived from such a model carries that as an error, and it is not quoted with the height. What the numbers refer to

The geoid model stops at a degree

Eleven essays treat the geoid as a surface that exists. Every geoid anybody uses is a series truncated at a degree, so every orthometric height derived from one carries an omission error nobody quotes with the height — eighteen centimetres at degree 360 — and the same truncation removes two thirds of the slope, which does not converge at all.

 One meridian, two datums, and the ground between them. "the meridian line of the 141st degree of west longitude" — Anglo-Russian Convention, 1825. The line whose longitude is exactly 141° west, drawn twice: once on nad27 and once on WGS84, with the east–west separation exaggerated 3,000 times. The two are 129.0 metres apart, and remarkably constant — the shift changes by five centimetres over nine degrees of latitude — so the strip between them is a ribbon 129 metres wide and 1039 kilometres long, which is 134.0 square kilometres. The sentence has not changed. The surface the number refers to has. Grids, and what a survey does

A meridian boundary moves when its datum does

The 141st meridian is the one boundary description in this collection with no geometric ambiguity in it: every reading of it is the same curve, exactly. It has a different one. A longitude refers to a datum, the 1825 convention named none, and the line of longitude exactly 141° west sits 129.0 metres apart on NAD27 and WGS84 — a ribbon 1,039 kilometres long and 134 square kilometres in area.

 One equidistance line, computed five ways. The line equidistant from two facing coasts — Jan Mayen and Greenland — traced by bisection along a fan of parallels, with the two distances measured on the ellipsoid, on the sphere, and with a ruler on three different pages. The basepoints are the same four in every case and the rule is the same words in every case. The sphere sits 20 metres from the ellipsoid; with a ruler on Lambert's cylindrical sits 13.2 kilometres from it, with 324 km² of seabed in between. A delimitation is a sentence about distances, and a distance is a statement about a surface. Grids, and what a survey does

An equidistance line belongs to a surface

A maritime boundary is very often defined as the line equidistant from two coasts — a description with no coordinate in it and no curve to choose between. It has a third ambiguity: equidistant measured how. On the ellipsoid, on the sphere, and with a ruler on three different charts, the same four basepoints give lines up to 39.6 kilometres apart and 2,816 square kilometres of seabed between them.

 The same tolerance, applied in two orders, at 65°. The faint line is the region's boundary as built, 1025 vertices across 400 km of ground. Both pipelines were given the same tolerance of 2000 m on the ground. Simplifying in degrees and then projecting keeps 311 of them; projecting into Mercator and then simplifying keeps 129; doing it on the ground itself, which no pipeline does, keeps 129. The two drawn lines separate by 1883 m, which is 94 per cent of the tolerance that was supposed to bound the whole operation. What a machine does with it

Simplification does not commute with the projection

A pipeline either simplifies the geometry and then projects it, or projects it and then simplifies. Both orders are in use, neither is recorded, and given the same tolerance in ground metres they keep different vertices — 129 of them on the ground, 367 in degree space at 80°, and 459 on an equal-area page.

 Three boundaries, three tripoints. Three bilateral boundaries drawn through one nominal point, each described as the line between two monuments and each realised under a different convention — a geodesic, a rhumb line and a straight line on a Mercator sheet. The tripoint is defined three times, once by each pair of boundaries, and the three definitions are the three marked crossings. They are 21.33 kilometres apart at the widest and enclose 194.960 square kilometres. Under one convention throughout, the same construction puts all three crossings within 0.0 millimetres of each other — which is the refusal this figure carries, and the reason the triangle is a fact about the conventions rather than about the crossing arithmetic. Grids, and what a survey does

A tripoint defined three times

A tripoint is very often not a coordinate in any treaty. It is a description — the point where the boundary between A and B meets the boundary between B and C — and each of those boundaries is itself a description. So the point is defined three times, once by each pair, and under one convention throughout the three definitions agree to half a micrometre. Under three they enclose 6.69 square kilometres.

 What a sheet does to the points before anybody measures them. The graticule crossings of a map drawn on Conformal conic, with an arrow at each one showing where the same crossing has moved to after the sheet dried — 0.1 per cent along the grain and 0.4 across it, with the grain at 23° to the map's axis, and the displacement magnified 60 times so it can be seen at all. The pattern is a stretch along one direction and a squeeze along the perpendicular, which is what an anisotropic scaling looks like. It is a property of the paper and has nothing to do with the map printed on it. A similarity fit to these points leaves 3.66e-4 of the map's own width unexplained, against 1.22e-10 on the unshrunk sheet. What is taught wrongly

The sheet moved before it was measured

Every method of reading a projection off a map takes its control points from the sheet and assumes the sheet is the one the cartographer drew. Paper shrinks across its grain three times as fast as along it, and on a map whose grain runs along its own axis that shrinkage is EXACTLY a change of standard parallel — one per cent moves the recovered parallel by 0.57 degrees with the residual sitting at the solver's floor.

 The whole of what an unlabelled map gives you. The outline of Japan as drawn on Conformal conic, delivered as an ordered list of page positions with nothing attached to any of them. No latitude, no longitude, no scale, no north. The question is whether a projection can be recovered from that, and it can: the correspondence between the ink and the ground is found by sweeping the starting point round the curve and both directions, and the true candidate comes back with a residual of 2.88e-14 against the runner-up's 4.57e-4. What is taught wrongly

A map with no graticule

Identifying a projection starts from control points, and a great many maps have none. Handed an outline with no labels on it at all, the method still works — and works better: the correspondence between ink and ground is recoverable exactly, because a similarity preserves ratios of arc length, and the margin on clean observations is 1.6 × 10¹⁰ against a graticule's 9.9 × 10⁶. What breaks it is noise, at three parts in a thousand.

 A meander grows, and its boundary moves with it. Three loops of a river whose valley repeats every 5 km, drawn when its bends are gentle — 30° at most from the valley's direction — and again at the moment its necks close to the channel's own 150 m width, at 120.3°. Under accretion the boundary is the deep-water line at every moment, so it moves with the river, and the shaded ground is the ground that has changed side of it between the two moments: 83.5 km², 27.8 km² a loop. The river is a stated sine-generated curve, not a surveyed one. Grids, and what a survey does

A river boundary goes where the river goes, or stays where it was

A boundary that follows a river moves when the river moves, and the law of every such boundary turns on one word: whether the river moved gradually or suddenly. Over one meander's life, gradual movement changes the country of about twenty-eight square kilometres of land a loop. A single flood that cuts the loop off strands twenty-six — nearly the same land, arriving as one parcel on the wrong side of the river.

 Two pairs of ten are in every picture that can be drawn. London, New York, Tokyo, Sydney, Cape Town, drawn holding seven of their ten pairs' bearings exactly — the most any flat picture of five places can hold. Of the 15,360 ways of choosing seven pairs and a direction on each, 152 give a picture whose held arrows all point forwards, and London–Tokyo and Sydney–Cape Town, drawn heavy, appear in every one of them. The three pairs this particular choice leaves out are dashed. The price is paid by the rest: the worst, New York to Sydney, is 142.1° from the truth. The impossibility

The pair that cannot be held is not the one the geometry names

Four world cities have exactly one pair of the six that no drawable picture holds, and the obvious candidate — the pair whose bearing there and bearing back disagree most — is not it. That quantity predicts something else exactly: whether a held pair's arrow has a forced direction. It separates the two groups with a clean gap and nothing in between. And at five places there is no forbidden pair at all, so the four-place case was a statement about how little room five constraints leave rather than about the map.

 A ring round the pole at 80°, and the two pieces it makes. the boundary of a small polar cap — and of everything else. A closed curve divides a sphere into two pieces and neither of them is the outside: one is 4 thousand square kilometres and the other is 506 thousand, a ratio of 130.6 to one, and the coordinates are the same either way. The two colours are the two pieces, sampled at points rather than shaded, because shading one of them would already be the decision this figure is about. What a machine does with it

A polygon on a sphere has no outside

Seven essays have treated a stored ring as a boundary between inside and outside. A closed curve on a sphere divides it into two pieces and neither of them is the outside, so every polygon in every file depends on a convention that no coordinate carries — and the two conventions in common use disagree by a factor of fourteen on any ring that contains a pole.

 A coast that agrees with its graticule, except where it was copied. The outline of Japan on a map whose graticule is a conformal conic projection. 30 per cent of the coast, drawn in the second ink, was copied from a sinusoidal sheet of the same ground and fitted into place so that its two ends meet the coast either side, the dots. The dashed line is the coast the graticule predicts. Everywhere else the drawn coast lies on it exactly; along the copied stretch it departs by up to 9.4 thousandths of the map's width. Nothing in the graticule shows it. What is taught wrongly

A compiled map agrees with its graticule except where it was copied

A map compiled from two sheets has no single projection behind it, and its graticule cannot say so. Its coast can — not as a residual, which is a number the size of a projection error, but as a profile: the drawn coast lies exactly on the one its graticule predicts, then departs from a seam, and returns at another. The seams are found to within one point in 720, and the stretch between them names the projection it was copied from with a margin of 3.6 × 10¹¹.

All threads