Mapthematics Forums

Well yeah, there are multiple ways to blend maps together. But then, I could also ignore both directions of your homotopy and use some other method entirely. So long as it unavoidably comes in multiple variations, you can't really claim it's the One True Way of blending maps and that all other ways ...

It really should not have surprised me that all the labels are in Korean, and therefore I can't read them.

daan wrote: ↑Sat Jan 24, 2026 8:34 pmI should make a list of things that do not have pseudoscientific claims attached to them.

It's pretty hard to prove that nobody has ever make a claim about something. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, after all. Therefore, such a list would itself be pseudoscientific...

I assume that it's "pseudo" in the sense that if the underlying data is from an ellipsoid rather than a sphere, it's not truly conformal, only approximately so. This can be a problem if you were actually counting on the Mercator's property of being conformal. Mind you, this is fairly easy ...

I would describe this as a perspective projection with a "height" of −½, halfway between the gnomonic projection at 0 and the stereographic projection at −1. I can see where you'd get ¾ if you counted diameters instead of radii, but where do you get ⅞? Ah, got it, you're talking about two ...

While the latest G.Projector does lack making oblique aspects of arbitrary projections... it did allow oblique aspects of the equirectangular, so I had used a two-step process. Yeah, I can do that workaround easily, but it leads to sloppy graticules because they're also "reprojected". And...

I'm too desperate to have support for more projections to be that fussy. The new projections in version 3.x (or 2.x later than 2.5, which is what I have) seem to be fairly obscure ones, not anything that I'm interested in. If they added Eisenlohr, or better polyhedral projections, or the ability to...

Your link is broken. It seems like you're too used to HTML syntax. Here's the correct version: http://www.quadibloc.com/maps/images/compare.jpg If the "Spherical Radius of 108°" caption was in the original drawing and means what I think it means, then that would indicate a farside perspect...

Of course, it's a moot point because they'll never regain the mainland anyway. Eh, "never" is a strong word for hypothetical events that are decades or centuries into the future. We can't know what time will bring. Not many people saw the collapse of the Soviet Union coming before it happ...

But in this case, the war is too recent; everyone is aware of it; I would not underestimate people's ability to fail to pay attention to geopolitical events happening further away than their backyard. There are probably a few people out there who watch so little news that they've missed the fact th...