An attempt is made to re-cast the curvature of a sphere in terms of area (meters squared) and money (dollars). It turns out that the curvature of the earth doesn’t cost that much. Some of the mathematical ideas touched on in this post are surface area, arc-length, and great circles.
Last Updated: Sunday, October 02, 2022 - 15:28:52.
In the animated graphic novel On Maps and Maths and Making Friends: A Curvature Story the concept behind and computation of curvature is visually and intuitively introduced for surfaces (of which the sphere is but one example). While giving a presentation about this book to the inviting folks at Science Cafe (video recording here), I received a question from one of member of the audience about an area result I was using to motivate curvature. Their question around about minute 26, which was essentially “How can it make sense to have a 1 x 1 square on the sphere?”, has stuck with me because of how I wished I had answered their question. This post is the not-so-concise answer I would like to have given.
Consider the images of the sphere shown in Figures 1, 2, and 3. When the sphere is viewed from the top, the Parallels are the circles (the rims of a wheel) and the Meridians are lines (the spokes of the wheel). More precisely, the Meridians are the circles of constant Longitude (i.e. the Lines of Longitude) while the Parallels are the circles of constant Latitude (i.e. the Lines of Latitude). Mathematically, we can describe a sphere of radius \(\rho\) parametrically as \[\begin{align} r(\theta,\phi)&=(\rho\sin(\phi)\cos(\theta),\rho\sin(\phi)\sin(\theta),\rho\cos(\phi)) \\ &= (f(\phi)\cos(\theta),f(\phi)\sin(\theta),h(\phi)), \end{align}\] where \[\begin{align} f(\phi)=\rho\sin(\phi)\;\; \mbox{and}\;\; h(\phi)=\rho\cos(\phi). \end{align}\] In this case, \(\theta^{R}\) is the angle (in radians) from the Prime Meridian to a Line of Longitude while the \(\phi^{R}\) is the angle (in radians) from the North Pole to a Line of Latitude. The value \(\psi^{\circ}=90^{\circ}-\phi^{\circ}\) is therefore the angle in degrees from the Equator to a Line of Latitude. The value \(\psi^{\circ}=90^{\circ}-\phi^{\circ}\) can also be called the \(\psi^{\circ}\)th Parallel.
Now define a Square on a Sphere to be the region between two equally spaced Latitudes and two Longitudes. The key to this definition is being able to correctly determine distances on a sphere.
…The images in Figures 1, 2, 3 would looks like those seen in Figures 4 and 5.
In the animated graphic novel On Maps and Maths and Making Friends: A Curvature Story, the characters Pete and Brenna need to refresh their own memories about the concept of a radian and it’s relationship to a circle. Figures 6 and 7 are snapshots of their notes (from the book).
The key to defining a square on a sphere as the region between two equally spaced Latitudes and two Longitudes is being able to correctly determine distances on a sphere. To illustrate how distance is related to latitude and longitude consider the situation summarized by
This situation is illustrated in Figures 8 and 9.
The Answer to the Question posed in Figure 8 begins to take shape when we realize that
Because the blue runner is always on the \(\theta=0\) longitude, their finish location will be \((\theta,\phi)=(0,\phi=?)\) for some as yet to be determined value of \(\phi\).
Similarly, the red runner is always on the \(\phi=0.616\) latitude, so they will have to finish at \((\theta,\phi)=(\theta=?,0.616)\) for some value we need to find \(\theta\).
Because each runner is on a sphere, the paths they are running along must also curve with the sphere. Mathematically speaking, the curve for the blue runner is \[\begin{align} r(\phi)&=r(\rho=5,\theta=0,\phi)\\ &=(5\sin(\phi),0,5\cos(\phi)), \end{align}\] while for the red runner the curve is \[\begin{align} r(\theta)&=r(\rho=5,\theta,\phi=0.616)\\ &=(2.88\cos(\theta),2.88\sin(\theta),4.08). \end{align}\] The length (l) and width (w) distances run along these curves are given by (arc-length) integrals \[\begin{align} l(\phi)&= \int_{\phi=0.616}^{\phi}\sqrt{\frac{dr}{d\phi}\cdot \frac{dr}{d\phi}}\; d\phi=5\phi-3.08 \\ w(\theta)&= \int_{\theta=0}^{\theta}\sqrt{\frac{dr}{d\theta}\cdot \frac{dr}{d\theta}}\; d\theta=2.88\theta. \end{align}\] Since each runner is to run a distance of 1 (mile) then solving the equations \[\begin{align} l(\phi) &=1=5\phi-2.08 \\ &\implies \phi=0.816=3.08/5, \\ w(\theta) &=1=2.88\theta \\ &\implies \theta=0.346=1/2.88. \end{align}\]
That is, if the blue runner starts at \((\theta,\phi)=(0,0.616)\) and finishes at \((\theta,\phi)=(0,0.816)\), then they will have run \(l=1\) (mile). In other words, at a starting latitude of \(\phi=0.616\) a distance of \(l=1\) mile corresponds to a change in latitude \(\Delta \phi=0.81-0.61=0.2^{R}\).
Similarly, if the red runner starts at \((\theta,\phi)=(0,0.616)\) and finishes at \((\theta,\phi)=(0.346,0.616)\), then they will also have run \(w=1\) (mile). However, in contrast, at a starting latitude of \(\phi=0.616\) a distance of \(w=1\) mile corresponds to a change in longitude \(\Delta \theta =0.346-0=0.346^{R}\) (a greater change than \(\Delta \phi=0.2\)!). In other words, at a starting latitude of \(\phi=0.616\), a \(w=1\) (mile) covers more longitudial distance than a \(l=1\) (mile) covers latitudinal distance.
The area of the square created by both runners on a sphere of radius \(\rho=5\) at starting latitude \(m=0.616\) is given by the (surface area) integral \[\begin{align} A&=\int_{\phi=0.616}^{\phi=0.816} \int_{\theta=0}^{\theta=0.346} 25\sin(\phi)\;d\theta \; d\phi\\ &=1.13 \;(\mbox{miles}^{2}). \end{align}\]
These computations are illustrated and summarized in Figure 10.
In general, the question posed in Figure 8 can be extended to a sphere of any radius \(\rho\), any starting latitude \(\mathbb{M}\), and for a rectangle of any length \(\mathbb{L}\) and width \(\mathbb{W}\). In this general case the arc-length integrals for the edges of sphere rectangle are
\[\begin{align} l(\Phi)&= \int_{\phi=\mathbb{M}}^{\Phi}\sqrt{\frac{dr}{d\phi}\cdot \frac{dr}{d\phi}}\; d\phi=\mathbb{L}, \\ w(\Theta)&= \int_{\theta=0}^{\Theta}\sqrt{\frac{dr}{d\theta}\cdot \frac{dr}{d\theta}}\; d\theta=\mathbb{W}. \end{align}\]
These equations can be solved for \(\Theta\) and \(\Phi\) in Mathematica as seen in Figure 11 to obtain
\[\begin{align} \Theta =\frac{\mathbb{W}\csc(\mathbb{M})}{\rho} \;\; \mbox{and} \;\; \Phi=\frac{\mathbb{L} + \mathbb{M}\rho}{\rho}. \end{align}\]
With these angles it is now possible to setup and evaluate the (surface area) integral for the area \(\mathbb{A}\) of a \(\mathbb{L} \times \mathbb{W}\) rectangle on a sphere of any radius \(\rho\) and any starting latitude \(\mathbb{M}\),
\[\begin{align} \mathbb{A}&= \int_{\phi=\mathbb{M}}^{\phi=\frac{\mathbb{L}+\mathbb{M}\rho}{\rho}}\int_{\theta=0}^{\theta=\frac{\mathbb{W}\csc(\mathbb{M})}{\rho}} \rho^{2}\sin(\phi)\; d\theta\; d\phi\\ &=\rho \mathbb{W} \csc(\mathbb{M})\left(\cos(\mathbb{M})-\cos\left(\frac{\mathbb{L}}{\rho}+\mathbb{M}\right) \right). \end{align}\]
Bringing all of the skills and results from above together we get the animations shown in Figures 12 and 14.
…This would be a pretty accurate representation as NASA shows this number as the equatorial radius of the Earth. Further, a \(1 (km) \times 1 (km)\) square at a starting latitude \(\phi=0.83^{R}\) (from North Pole) or \(42^{\circ}N\) (from Equator) on the Earth according to Google Earth will look like the region of Figure 16 and have an area shown in Figure 17.
Using the area function \(\mathbb{A}\) as seen in Figure 18, computes the area of this region to be approximately \(A=1km^{2}+0.000072km^{2}=1km^{2}+72m^{2}\), which we note is greater than \(1km^{2}\) but not really by that much.
To put these area numbers into context, assume that you are a farmer in Iowa at \(42^{\circ}N\) who needs to fertilize one of your \(1km \times 1km\) fields.
If you purchased exactly \(1km^{2}\) (essentially \(247 acres\)) of fertilizer then (at \(\$50/acre\)) while you would have spent a total of \(\$12,350\) you still would have come up short by \(72m^{2}\) (essentially \(0.02\) acres). The cost estimate of fertilizer came from my brother-in-law who is farmer in Northwest Pennsylvania.
To finish the field you would need an additional \(\$1=\$50/acre\cdot 0.02acre\) of fertilizer for a total cost of \(\$12,351\). In other words, the cost of curvature to fertilize the field is \(\$1\)!
That is, the cost of curvature is \(0.008\%\) of the total costs to fertilize the field. While this is indeed a small percentage it does accurately reflect the costs of curvature. However, at the large radii of the Earth, the curvature effects are almost negligible from a cost perspective in this particular application…of fertilizer (pun intended).
…We will delve further into great circles (or geodesics of the sphere), as we attempt to find a better way to connect the quantification of the curvature \(\kappa\) of a sphere of radius \(\rho\) given by the formula \[\begin{align} \kappa=\frac{1}{\rho^{2}} \end{align}\] with the area of, not a square as shown in this post, but rather a special triangle called a geodesic triangle on the sphere.