Difference between revisions of "Talk:977: Map Projections"

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search
(Link to http://mjmdavis.com/showing/2017/05/16/how-to-read-maps.html)
m (Use MediaWiki syntax for '''bold''', not the Markdown one for **bold**)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
I like the Azimuthal Equidistant (equatorial aspect) the best. - not Pennpenn. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.43|108.162.221.43]] 01:15, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 
I like the Azimuthal Equidistant (equatorial aspect) the best. - not Pennpenn. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.43|108.162.221.43]] 01:15, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
  
You can explore and compare different map projections and their distortions (using Tissot’s indicatrix and triangulation of sphere) in an interactive blog post **[http://mjmdavis.com/showing/2017/05/16/how-to-read-maps.html The problem with maps]** by Michael Davis --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 14:58, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
+
You can explore and compare different map projections and their distortions (using Tissot’s indicatrix and triangulation of sphere) in an interactive blog post '''[http://mjmdavis.com/showing/2017/05/16/how-to-read-maps.html The problem with maps]''' by Michael Davis --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 14:58, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
  
 
;Dymaxion
 
;Dymaxion

Revision as of 15:00, 26 May 2017

I have a Plate Carrée hanging on my wall myself. Never failed me yet. Davidy22[talk] 07:05, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

I like the Azimuthal Equidistant (equatorial aspect) the best. - not Pennpenn. 108.162.221.43 01:15, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

You can explore and compare different map projections and their distortions (using Tissot’s indicatrix and triangulation of sphere) in an interactive blog post The problem with maps by Michael Davis --JakubNarebski (talk) 14:58, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Dymaxion

Dymaxion is clearly the best. There's nothing like a map made out of an unfolded d20. Alpha (talk) 19:43, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Makes you wonder what if a dodecahedron had been used instead of an icosahedron. --Quicksilver (talk) 18:02, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Here you go: http://www.progonos.com/furuti/MapProj/Normal/ProjPoly/Foldout/Dodecahedron/dodecahedron.html - Frankie (talk) 16:40, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Quincunx

Peirce Quincuncial has 4 non-conformal points, but not the 4 corners, which are the south pole, but instead are the 4 midpoints of the sides. These are on the equator and seem to be 90 degrees apart.--DrMath 06:30, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

I love Peirce Quincuncial, yet I slept throughout that "Inception". 141.101.99.228 11:36, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm surprised nobody thought of "really looking at your hands" as a hint that person that likes this projection is under influence of LSD or similar drug. As this surely is a thing that you do. (and you'll think of it next time you smoke your joint - inception!) --108.162.254.137 17:29, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Plus it has a picture of a man looking at his hand and a man looking at the man looking at his hand. I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait (talk) 14:39, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

xkcd 1051's title text - "meta lucid dreaming". I really got excited that there was an article about and ironically, it leads to meta and lucid dreaming separately. 173.245.55.67 21:23, 25 March 2014 (UTC)BK201

The common video game trope of "the far east of the world is connected to the far west, and the far north likewise to the far south" is popularly resolved by saying that those game worlds are toroidal shapes. (For a particular reference, I am thinking of the SNES and PSX era Final Fantasy games (4-9.)) But sometime in the last year, I got the idea that you could also resolve that geographical conflict (and claim they are spherical) by the logic that the "world map" you see in those games (where they have one) is a Peirce Qunincuncial map. Is my logic sound? Boct1584 (talk) 15:31, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

The explanation for the Peirce Quincuncial seems to miss the fact that Randall is implying that anyone who likes this map is most likely high. Getting lost in deep thought over things like your hands, or sitting in a dark theater for 6 hours to wrap your head around Inception...these are all very stereotypical "has smoke a lot of marijuana" behaviors. 108.162.216.21 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Waterman

In actual fact, the Waterman butterfly map used a truncated octahedron based upon the mathematics of close packing of spheres and is not at all based upon any of CaHill's work/math. -- steve waterman 65.92.20.61 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Perhaps the explanation should mention that Waterman himself signed up at forum.xkcd.com and vigorously denied that his map has anything to do with Cahill. At the time, it was unclear whether the account was really Waterman, or just a troll trying to make him look bad. - Frankie (talk) 21:39, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Kavrayskiy VII

Kavrayskiy is the best projection, despite being so far out of the mainstream that no-one west of Ukraine has seen one for the past 20 years. 173.245.54.64 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Wow, I looked into it and it really seems like an excellent projection. It's been a while since I've looked at projections but I think it's my new favourite as it has everything that I've been looking for in a projection. It's a more accurate (in extremes) and more pleasing Robinson projection that still has a reasonable amount cut off the top. Also, the indicatrix for it is very simple, as is the formula, and simple things please simple minds (like mine, apparently) -- without taking it to an extreme like the equirectangular projection does. I swear I've come across it before, but then again I grew up in a country which wasn't far from the Eastern Bloc. 141.101.98.214 14:51, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
Sphere

To be fair, what is drawn is an orthographic azimuthal projection.--108.162.216.153 18:59, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

GLOBES ARE THE BEST although my enormous Winkel Tripel hasn't done too bad. 108.162.219.9 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)