Skip to main content

special functions - Peirce's quincuncial projection


The Peirce quincuncial projection is the cartographic projection of a sphere onto a square.


In short, I would like to see it implemented in Mathematica.


Here is my code:


Clear[InversePeirceQuincunicalMapping]; 
InversePeirceQuincunicalMapping[x_Real, y_Real] := 
 Module[{cn, m = 1/2, th, phi},
        cn = JacobiCN[x 2 EllipticK[m] + I 2 y EllipticK[1 - m], m];
        {th, phi} = {2 ArcTan[Abs[cn]], Arg[cn]};
        {th, phi}]


zf[{th_, phi_}] := Cos[th]
xf[{th_, phi_}] := Sin[th] Cos[phi]
yf[{th_, phi_}] := Sin[th] Sin[phi]

The contours that correspond to the equation $\theta=\frac{\pi}{2}$, besides the expected tilted square, also includes the diagonal and anti-diagonal. This is not an artifact and can be proven.


contour of inverse Peirce mapping


These lines make me suspect that I am not doing the projection the right way. I would be glad to see a prototype implementation of it in Mathematica.


Thank you.



Answer




(I had been meaning to write a blog entry about this myself, but since this question has come up, I suppose I'll just write about it here instead...)


In demonstrating how the quincuncial projection works, consider first the following complex mapping:


With[{ω = N[EllipticK[1/2], 20]},
     ParametricPlot[{Re[InverseJacobiCN[Tan[φ/2] Exp[I θ], 1/2]],
                     Im[InverseJacobiCN[Tan[φ/2] Exp[I θ], 1/2]]},
                    {φ, 0, π}, {θ, -π, π}, Mesh -> Automatic,
                    MeshStyle -> {Orange, Green}, PlotPoints -> 75,
                    PlotRange -> {{0, 2 ω}, {-ω, ω}}]]

Peirce's projection



The components should be easily recognizable (e.g. the argument of the elliptic integral is a stereographic projection/Riemann sphere representation of a complex number).


The only fixed thing in applying the projection is the use of either the cosine amplitude function $\mathrm{cn}\left(u\mid \frac12\right)$ or its inverse; the choice of which stereographic projection to do is dependent on what coordinate convention you take for spherical coordinates.


For instance, if your convention is longitude/latitude (as with the output of CountryData[]), here's how one might implement the projection:


world = {{Switch[CountryData[#, "Continent"],
                 "Asia", Yellow, "Oceania", Green, "Europe", Pink,
                 "NorthAmerica", Red, "SouthAmerica", Orange, "Africa", GrayLevel[1/10],
                 "Antarctica", GrayLevel[9/10], _, Blue], 
          CountryData[#, {"FullPolygon", "Equirectangular"}]} & /@ 
          Append[CountryData[], "Antarctica"]} /.
          {θ_?NumericQ, φ_?NumericQ} :>

          Through[{Re, Im}[InverseJacobiCN[Cot[φ °/2 + Ï€/4] Exp[I θ °], 1/2]]];

With[{ω = N[EllipticK[1/2], 20]}, 
 tile = Image[Graphics[Prepend[world,
                       {ColorData["Legacy", "PowderBlue"], Rectangle[{0, -ω}, {2 ω, ω}]}],
                       ImagePadding -> None, PlotRangePadding -> None],
              ImageResolution -> 300]]

quincuncially-projected world map


The only snag in this is that some post-processing is necessary if one wants to remove the polygons that are turned into "slivers" by the transformation, as can be seen when one tries to tile the image given above:



Graphics[{Texture[tile], 
          Polygon[{{0, 0}, {1, 0}, {1, 1}, {0, 1}}, 
                  VertexTextureCoordinates -> {{1, 0}, {1, 1}, {0, 1}, {0, 0}}], 
          Polygon[{{1, 0}, {2, 0}, {2, 1}, {1, 1}}, 
                  VertexTextureCoordinates -> {{0, 1}, {0, 0}, {1, 0}, {1, 1}}], 
          Polygon[{{0, 1}, {1, 1}, {1, 2}, {0, 2}}, 
                  VertexTextureCoordinates -> {{0, 1}, {0, 0}, {1, 0}, {1, 1}}], 
          Polygon[{{1, 1}, {2, 1}, {2, 2}, {1, 2}}, 
                  VertexTextureCoordinates -> {{1, 0}, {1, 1}, {0, 1}, {0, 0}}]}]


A Peirce tiling


(You can do the sliver removal yourself, if you want it.)



If, like me, you prefer the longitude/colatitude convention, the stereographic projection proceeds a bit differently. For this example, I'll transform an image instead of transforming polygons. ImageTransformation[] does a nice job for this route:


earthGrid = Import["http://i.stack.imgur.com/Zzox0.png"];
With[{ω = N[EllipticK[1/2], 20]},
     eg = ImageTransformation[earthGrid, 
          With[{w = JacobiCN[#[[1]] + I #[[2]], 1/2]}, {Arg[w], 2 ArcCot[Abs[w]]}] &, 
          DataRange -> {{-π, π}, {0, π}}, Padding -> 1., PlotRange -> {{0, 2 ω}, {-ω, ω}}]]


quincuncially-projected image


Using code similar to the one given above, we can see the tiling for this as well: Peirce tiled image


For image transformation purposes, however, I have found the execution of the built-in JacobiCN[] for complex arguments to be a bit slow, so I wrote my own implementation of a function that can replace JacobiCN[z, 1/2]:


SetAttributes[cnhalf, Listable];
cnhalf[z_?NumericQ] := Block[{nz = N[z], k, zs},
       k = Max[0, Ceiling[Log2[4 Abs[nz]]]];
       zs = (nz 2^-k)^2;
       Nest[With[{cs = #^2}, -(((cs + 2) cs - 1)/((cs - 2) cs - 1))] &,
            (1 - zs/4 (1 + zs/30 (1 + zs/8)))/(1 + zs/4 (1 - zs/30 (1 - zs/8))), k]]


which works quite nicely. (Exercise: try to recognize the formulae I used.)


Using, for instance, the ETOPO1 global relief,


etopo1 = Import["http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/image/color_etopo1_ice_low.jpg"];

we finally present the other way to demonstrate the quincuncial projection:


With[{ω = N[EllipticK[1/2], 20]},
     etp = ImageTransformation[etopo1, 
           With[{w = cnhalf[#[[1]] + I #[[2]]]}, {Arg[w], 2 ArcCot[Abs[w]]}] &, 
           DataRange -> {{-π, π}, {0, π}}, Padding -> 1.,
           PlotRange -> {{0, 2 ω}, {-ω, ω}}]];


Graphics[{Texture[etp], 
         Polygon[{{0, 0}, {1, 0}, {1, 1}, {0, 1}}, 
                 VertexTextureCoordinates -> {{1, 1}, {0, 1}, {0, 0}, {1, 0}}], 
         Polygon[{{1, 0}, {3/2, 0}, {3/2, 1/2}, {1, 1/2}}, 
                 VertexTextureCoordinates -> {{0, 0}, {1/2, 0}, {1/2, 1/2}, {0, 1/2}}],
         Polygon[{{1/2, -1/2}, {1, -1/2}, {1, 0}, {1/2, 0}}, 
                 VertexTextureCoordinates -> {{1/2, 1/2}, {1, 1/2}, {1, 1}, {1/2, 1}}],
         Polygon[{{1, -1/2}, {3/2, -1/2}, {3/2, 0}, {1, 0}},
                 VertexTextureCoordinates -> {{1, 1/2}, {1/2, 1/2}, {1/2, 0}, {1, 0}}]}]


Another Peirce projection


(I had previously posted this image in chat. Now you know where it came from. ;))



For an out-of-this-world bonus, here's another image that I have quincuncially projected:


http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/spaceimages/details.php?id=PIA15482


Can you guess the original equirectangular image I made this from?


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...
Post a Comment
Read more

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...
Post a Comment
Read more

What is and isn't a valid variable specification for Manipulate?

I have an expression whose terms have arguments (representing subscripts), like this: myExpr = A[0] + V[1,T] I would like to put it inside a Manipulate to see its value as I move around the parameters. (The goal is eventually to plot it wrt one of the variables inside.) However, Mathematica complains when I set V[1,T] as a manipulated variable: Manipulate[Evaluate[myExpr], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, T], 0, 1}] (*Manipulate::vsform: Manipulate argument {V[1,T],0,1} does not have the correct form for a variable specification. >> *) As a workaround, if I get rid of the symbol T inside the argument, it works fine: Manipulate[ Evaluate[myExpr /. T -> 15], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, 15], 0, 1}] Why this behavior? Can anyone point me to the documentation that says what counts as a valid variable? And is there a way to get Manpiulate to accept an expression with a symbolic argument as a variable? Investigations I've done so far: I tried using variableQ from this answer , but it says V[1...
Post a Comment
Read more