4 ms·
Weird title. Cargography constantly challenged itself. Look at some of the possible projections at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map_projections https://en.wiki
by holgerschurig 23d ago
Weird title. Cargography constantly challenged itself. Look at some of the possible projections at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map_projections https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map_projections
They all compromise on something to enhance something else. You simply can't map the surface of a 3d shere (approximation of the earths globe) onto a 2d flat surface.
And so we have projections galore. And anyway was (and is) always free to use whatever fits best.
- tialaramex 23d agoAnd the article text does a pretty good job (to me as a layman who was aware Dymaxion existed but doesn't spend much time thinking about this) of illustrating, just the title seems to be for a much more reactionary nonsense article.
- throw0101a 23d ago> You simply can't map the surface of a 3d shere (approximation of the earths globe) onto a 2d flat surface. This would be an easier problem to solve if Flat Earthers were right. (semi-/s)
- Byvrsakjo10 23d agoI agree cartography has always been challenging itself, it is possible the size of most nations have been miscalculated.
- tialaramex 23d ago> it is possible the size of most nations have been miscalculated Huh? Are you a Flat Earth believer? We can literally see the countries from space. The problem wasn't that we don't know how big they are but that, as your parent explains, it is not possible to have a flat map which accurately depicts a (roughly) spherical terrain. A flat map has to be "wrong" in some sense and this change picks a map which made a trade off that favours accurate size (e.g. ratio between size of Greenland and Africa)
- ChucklsTheBeard 23d agoI don't know what OP's intent was, but the objective reading is likely true; they have (previously) been miscalculated. Louis XIV famously said "You have cost me more territory than all my enemies" when he received a more accurate map of France in 1682 (the Cassini map), showing its size was ~20% smaller than previously calculated.
- respectattentio 23d agoIt is insane how the big mistake lasted. After seeing each country before and after side by side on a website, it's insane how big the difference in false sizes of countries compared. Like Greenland vs Africa, come on man!! This must be a joke (and still lasted 457 years).
- bentley 23d agoDo you think the UN was using Mercator before this vote?
- respectattentio 23d agoI don't think so. They usually don't use what has not been agreed on officially.
- nickdothutton 23d agoI thought everyone learned the Mercator use case in school? It is for marine navigation. A line of constant bearing will always appear straight on it. If you want to see the relative size of continents that's a different use case and you need a different projection.
- respectattentio 23d agoNever knew that and millions are so. Why? Because it is not used just for marine navigation. It is mostly used for everything related to maps and apps with maps.
- SR2Z 22d agoApps with maps use a specific and different Mercator projection which produces a nice quadtree for dynamically loading data. This is possible with other projections too, but reprojection and training users to expect a different looking map is expensive. Almost nobody plots courses of constant bearing on a map. Almost nobody uses a map to measure area either. 99% of the use cases for maps these days are for local navigation where artifacts are minor. The differences in map projection are basically irrelevant to users in these cases.