Technically, the outer surface of a sphere is, itself, two-dimensional. It is, however, non-Euclidean and cannot be perfectly preserved in a Euclidean two-dimensional space.
Equal area projections usually preserve straight and perpendicular meridians and parallels. That’s neutral but then there’s the political decision of what latitude gets the correct aspect ratio. And Gall-Peters is not anti-colonialist if representing Africa correctly was your goal.
They want a 2d map of earth but with every continent to true size at scale, rather than Mercator projection where the northern hemisphere is expanded to increase their importance over the southern hemisphere.
Mercator wasn’t created in order to increase importance of the northern hemisphere, but to allow for directional rhumb lines to be drawn for shipping. For its intended purpose of navigation, it does an excellent job.
It may not be the intended purpose but I certainly does change how the world is seen by everyone using it to warp the mind’s eye to how the world actually physically is.
Edit: Does it do an excellent job for navigational purposes if you are shipping from Japan to Brazil or it it only excellent for shipping from the northern hemisphere to the northern hemisphere?
The Mercator projection was designed for use in marine navigation because of its unique property of representing any course of constant bearing as a straight segment. Such a course, known as a rhumb (alternately called a rhumb line or loxodrome) is preferred in marine navigation because ships can sail in a constant compass direction.
Perhaps if they are unaware that a 3D image of a geoid projected onto a 2D plane can cause issues, however every projection will have its own failings whether area, shape or directional (angular). Familiarity also comes into play, and i believe that is more at the root of the issue you bring up.
I don’t know what you mean by “other such variations”, but maybe you are looking for a map with something like the Mollweide projection? That’s a bit of distortion in shape but trying to keep areas real.
The projection is the mathematical transformation from the curved surface of the Earth to a mathematical surface. You can have types of projections based on the mathematical surface (conical, cylindrical…), or based on the features they want to rescue from this transformation (conformal, equal-area…), but, sorry, I’ve never heard of a classification based on these “slices”. Moreover, now that I think of it, even those projections we are familiar with have to be cut somewhere.
No, I know what you mean but that looks like some azimuthal projections put together in some conventional way. Maybe the concept you are looking for is a “composite” projection?
Anyone know of a 2D map print of true size? All I’ve found print wise is Mercator or other such variations.
Technically, the outer surface of a sphere is, itself, two-dimensional. It is, however, non-Euclidean and cannot be perfectly preserved in a Euclidean two-dimensional space.
Mathematically impossible, but you could try an Equal Area projection.
Equal area projections usually preserve straight and perpendicular meridians and parallels. That’s neutral but then there’s the political decision of what latitude gets the correct aspect ratio. And Gall-Peters is not anti-colonialist if representing Africa correctly was your goal.
Essentially this. A true sized projection, it can be in any “cut” of the globe as long as all the continents are true to size.
Let me know if I understand correctly. You want a true to life sized map of earth? 😳
They want a 2d map of earth but with every continent to true size at scale, rather than Mercator projection where the northern hemisphere is expanded to increase their importance over the southern hemisphere.
Mercator wasn’t created in order to increase importance of the northern hemisphere, but to allow for directional rhumb lines to be drawn for shipping. For its intended purpose of navigation, it does an excellent job.
It may not be the intended purpose but I certainly does change how the world is seen by everyone using it to warp the mind’s eye to how the world actually physically is.
Edit: Does it do an excellent job for navigational purposes if you are shipping from Japan to Brazil or it it only excellent for shipping from the northern hemisphere to the northern hemisphere?
Do you seriously think that the geometrical properties of the projection change below the equator? You need to learn yourself some geometry.
It works for any shipping lines
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercator_projection
Perhaps if they are unaware that a 3D image of a geoid projected onto a 2D plane can cause issues, however every projection will have its own failings whether area, shape or directional (angular). Familiarity also comes into play, and i believe that is more at the root of the issue you bring up.
As for your navigational questions, this Reddit thread may be helpful https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4s4869/eli5_how_mercator_projections_are_better_for/
Exactl, this.
That’s not why Mercator exists
I don’t know what you mean by “other such variations”, but maybe you are looking for a map with something like the Mollweide projection? That’s a bit of distortion in shape but trying to keep areas real.
What do they call the projections that have slices taken out of them at the oceans?
The projection is the mathematical transformation from the curved surface of the Earth to a mathematical surface. You can have types of projections based on the mathematical surface (conical, cylindrical…), or based on the features they want to rescue from this transformation (conformal, equal-area…), but, sorry, I’ve never heard of a classification based on these “slices”. Moreover, now that I think of it, even those projections we are familiar with have to be cut somewhere.
Another post in this thread had an example of one, called Goode’s Homolosine Equal-area Projection.
No, I know what you mean but that looks like some azimuthal projections put together in some conventional way. Maybe the concept you are looking for is a “composite” projection?
No, because Africa is larger than Russia, this shows Russia as massive.
Africa: 30.3 million km²
Asia: 44 million km²
Nowhere near the difference Mercator projection maps make it out to be, but Asia definitely is larger.
Russia*
You may want to double check that, or you probably will need an imaginary map.