[edby]

Those don't "actually exist" either. As in, there are an infinite number of lines joining the north and south poles, and any one of them could have been the "zero line".

The tropics, on the other hand, and the equator could be said to "exist in reality", given that they actually represent something real. Same perhaps for the lines of latitude that represent the angles to the sun/north and south celestial poles (ie, all of them).¿

I guess what I'm saying is there's no discernible reason for David Apple to draw lines of longitude on his map. The tropics and the equator, though, should be represented.

I agree the London meridian being the 'zero line' is a matter of convention. But given any point on the earth, there is a longitude line going through it, and that line exists in reality, in that there is a measurement corresponding to it. Anything that can be measured, exists in reality.

Which brings me to another point about the map. Lines of longitude are straight, and that straightness really exists (relative to the surface of the earth). Why are they curved on the Peirce map?

[edit] Most commentaries will say that lat and long are 'imaginary lines'. Clearly: they are not lines drawn on chalk on the earth. But then chalk lines are not lines either: look at them closely and they contain all sorts of irregularities. No true line, i.e. nothing that is truly the shortest distance between two points, exists, all lines are imaginary.

[Max_Almond]

I'd say the equator and the Tropics exist, and that any flat earth map ought to have these drawn on them, at a minimum.

It could also have a straight line drawn from the north pole through Greenwich, for convention's sake, called zero degrees.

I guess once you have that it's a matter of common sense that there are other lines of longitude - but there's no way they should bend, but merely work as the spokes of a wheel, with the north pole at its hub. Unless David wants to have the lines of longitude representing the direction to magnetic north, which is a whole other deal entirely (those lines could be said to exist in reality - changing though they are).

[Tontogary]

Meridians of longitude all have meridional passage (solar noon) at the same time each day. It makes it impossible on David’s map to have that.

[davidapple]

I don't think you understand the point that I am trying to make.

Yes, the prime meridian is an arbitrary line of longitude. It is man-made. Humans decided to center the world around Greenwich in London. They could just have easily decided to center it around the Giza pyramids in Egypt, New York, Quebec, Tokyo, Auckland or anywhere.

The point that I am trying to make is: when you convert the Equrectangual map projection into the Peirce Quincuncial Projection you have to choose a line of longitude to center the projection. If you choose to center the map around Reykjavik in Iceland, you end up with a map projection that shows Ne Zaland as very far away from Australia. This is the image used on Wikipedia with Reykjavik in Iceland as the prime meridian of the Equrectangual map projection used to create the image.

However, if you use the real prime meridian in Greenwich London to create the Peirce Quincuncial Projection from the Equrectangual map projection. There is very small distortion to large land masses. The only areas of land that are distorted quite a lot are tiny islands in the middle of the sea.

So, it is quite a coincidence that the prime meridian that we use around the world has this property. The property of causing very little distortion when used to create the Peirce Quincuncial Projection.

Delving a little deeper, we see Greenwich chosen in 1884 and the Peirce Quincuncial Projection chosen in 1879. Just 5 years apart. That's interesting isn't it?...

I hope someone out there understands what I am trying to say. I have yet to get any feedback on this incredible coincidence and the fact that Wikipedia are showing the incorrectly calculated image.

[douglips]

There are only three major land masses South of the equator (other than Antarctica.) I'm not sure how much to attribute to this brings a coincidence.

Note though that if you include Antarctica, no choice of meridian results in an accurate map. Land that straddles the pole is a big problem for your projection

[davidapple]

Note though that if you include Antarctica, no choice of meridian results in an accurate map. Land that straddles the pole is a big problem for your projection

It is impossible for any member of the public to calculate the full shape of the coast of Antarctica.

You are missing the point.

Do I have to calculate 10 versions of the Peirce Quincuncial Projection with different prime meridians for you to understand exactly how much of a coincidence this is? If so, give me 10 randomly chosen locations on the Earth and I will.

[Max_Almond]

I may be missing the point. I thought you were trying to create an accurate flat earth map. But are you now saying you just want to create a more accurate PQ projection?

[douglips]

Before we get too excited, how distorted is Sumatra on your map? How distorted is Africa? The coastline of Africa has an almost 90 degree angle in the Gulf of Guinea that you appear to have nearly completely straightened out. On your map, you'd never think South America and Africa fit together like jigsaw puzzles, but they should look like that.

There are three major land masses south of the equator besides Antarctica. You could find many ways to slice the map that would work equally well, for example, right now you have four quadrants on your map. What if you had 3 sections, or 5 or six?

I'm just not that excited that you think this is a great coincidence given the drastic mistreatments of things like the shape of Africa or the size of Sumatra.
Why is moving New Zealand farther away from Australia a bigger problem to you than blowing up Sumatra to be way bigger than Japan? In real life they are nearly the same size.

[davidapple]

I may be missing the point. I thought you were trying to create an accurate flat earth map. But are you now saying you just want to create a more accurate PQ projection?

I'm simply asking if there is a connection between Greenwich and Charles Sanders Peirce.

[Max_Almond]

I may be missing the point. I thought you were trying to create an accurate flat earth map. But are you now saying you just want to create a more accurate PQ projection?

I'm simply asking if there is a connection between Greenwich and Charles Sanders Peirce.

I wouldn't have thought so. Probably as you say above: the proximity of the dates is simply coincidence.

[edby]

I may be missing the point. I thought you were trying to create an accurate flat earth map. But are you now saying you just want to create a more accurate PQ projection?

I'm simply asking if there is a connection between Greenwich and Charles Sanders Peirce.

I wouldn't have thought so. Probably as you say above: the proximity of the dates is simply coincidence.

Peirce is now known as a philosopher and logician, but from 1859 to 1891 he was employed by the U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey. That would explain his interest in projections. And the late 19th century saw a culmination of various geodetic projects to measure the shape of the earth.

So not a coincidence, but of no particular significance, in my view.

[davidapple]

I may be missing the point. I thought you were trying to create an accurate flat earth map. But are you now saying you just want to create a more accurate PQ projection?

I'm simply asking if there is a connection between Greenwich and Charles Sanders Peirce.

I wouldn't have thought so. Probably as you say above: the proximity of the dates is simply coincidence.

Peirce is now known as a philosopher and logician, but from 1859 to 1891 he was employed by the U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey. That would explain his interest in projections. And the late 19th century saw a culmination of various geodetic projects to measure the shape of the earth.

So not a coincidence, but of no particular significance, in my view.

It is significant. Here is the evidence.



Notice how New Zealand is thrown out when calculated with the prime meridian in Mexico. Similar to when calculating from Reykjavik.

London seems like the only place that preserves the shapes of 99% of land masses. This seems like more than a coincidence to me.

Does anyone know the official reason why Greenwich was chosen as the prime meridian?

[edby]

London seems like the only place that preserves the shapes of 99% of land masses. This seems like more than a coincidence to me.

Does anyone know the official reason why Greenwich was chosen as the prime meridian?

Big competition between English and French, who had their own Paris meridian. French gave way in the end, in return for some concession. Purely political reason.

[Max_Almond]

Does anyone know the official reason why Greenwich was chosen as the prime meridian?

Wikipedia seems like a good place to start if you're interested in the history of the prime meridian:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_meridian

[davidapple]

London seems like the only place that preserves the shapes of 99% of land masses. This seems like more than a coincidence to me.

Does anyone know the official reason why Greenwich was chosen as the prime meridian?

Big competition between English and French, who had their own Paris meridian. French gave way in the end, in return for some concession. Purely political reason.

I find a hard to believe that it was purely a political reason when this line of longitude works so perfectly to create the Peirce Quincuncial projection (which was developed just 5 years before).

I understand if you have doubts that this projection is an actual flat Earth map. But this "political coincidence" leads me to believe that it is part of the jigsaw puzzle.

[iamcpc]

I find a hard to believe that it was purely a political reason when this line of longitude works so perfectly to create the Peirce Quincuncial projection (which was developed just 5 years before).

I understand if you have doubts that this projection is an actual flat Earth map. But this "political coincidence" leads me to believe that it is part of the jigsaw puzzle.

The only real problem with this is the shipping times and flight times and distances.

[Round Eyes]

my favorite part of these flat earth maps is how latitude and longitude apparently have no real meaning and are treated as just lines on a piece of paper.  there is a reason you can determine your lat/long anywhere on earth with some simple tools.  They have observable characteristics as it relates to the globe and your location.  They are NOT part of some Round Earth conspiracy.  If you want to create a flat earth map and at least remove some of the issues, just delete the lines.  if you are going to make a fake map, dont try and fake the lat/long.

[Dr David Thork]

my favorite part of these flat earth maps is how latitude and longitude apparently have no real meaning and are treated as just lines on a piece of paper. 

Are you suggesting there are large blue lines painted across the ocean? Or are they just lines on a piece of paper?

[edby]

my favorite part of these flat earth maps is how latitude and longitude apparently have no real meaning and are treated as just lines on a piece of paper. 

Are you suggesting there are large blue lines painted across the ocean? Or are they just lines on a piece of paper?

They have real meaning and are used to calculate shipping distances.

Knowledge of a ship's east-west position was essential when approaching land. After a long voyage, cumulative errors in dead reckoning frequently led to shipwrecks and a great loss of life. Avoiding such disasters became vital in Harrison's lifetime, in an era when trade and navigation were increasing dramatically around the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harrison

You know Harrison’s story, right?

The Scilly naval disaster of 1707 was the loss of four warships of a Royal Navy fleet off the Isles of Scilly in severe weather on 22 October 1707. 1550 sailors lost their lives aboard the wrecked vessels, making the incident one of the worst maritime disasters in British naval history. The disaster has been attributed to the navigators' inability to accurately calculate their positions, to errors in the available charts and pilot books, to inadequate compasses and to a combination of these factors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scilly_naval_disaster_of_1707

[edby]

I understand if you have doubts that this projection is an actual flat Earth map. But this "political coincidence" leads me to believe that it is part of the jigsaw puzzle.

I have doubts that it represents the actual distances, both sea and land, to anything like the right amount. Is that what you meant?

I don't understand the 'jigsaw puzzle' bit at all.