Map–territory relation

The map on a scale of 1:1 a hypothetical card, which is so provided on a scale of 1:1 without any form of generalization. It represents a paradox of cartographic modeling and has been described in several short stories and essays, including Jorge Luis Borges, Lewis Carroll, Umberto Eco and Michael Ende.

Background

A map at a scale of 1:1,000,000 may map to a square an area of ​​1 million square kilometers (about the area of Egypt ), a map at a scale of 1:1000 showing the same area about one square kilometer, and is therefore more accurate. 1:1 scale, the map area is as large as the area presented to the earth's surface.

In the history of cartography maps served among other things as a prestige object. The more accurate a map, the better informed was the users. This led to the idea of ​​game that a ruler would need to provide information to interested accurate as possible a replica of his empire - under certain circumstances in the 1:1 scale.

Literary Reception of the idea

The description of the map in 1:1 scale first appeared in 1893 in the novel Sylvie and Bruno Concluded by Lewis Carroll, in which a stranger named "My Lord " was that made ​​a map at a scale of 1:1 in his country on the emperor during the reported be. She had never been used much since the peasants had protested against the unfolding. That is why now we use the country itself, as its own map, and this is almost as practical ( " we now use the country Itself, as its own map, and I Assure you it does nearly as well .")

Jorge Luis Borges attacked the idea in the short story " Del rigor en la ciencia " ( dt: "From the rigor of science" ) on. He describes an empire with such perfect cards that "the map of a single Province occupied the space of a city and the Map of the Empire the one province. " When these cards were no longer sufficient, a map » was created, the exact size of the had Empire and coincided with it at every point. " later generations neglected the care of the card, so that only ruins remained. Borges published this story as ostensible quote from a fictional author from 1658 to create the illusion of historical authenticity.

The philosopher Umberto Eco processed the thought experiment in his book " Diario minimo " of 1963. In humorous, but scientific characteristic style he defines in his essay " The Map of the Empire on a 1:1 scale " first the requirements for this card ( and not territorialkoextensiv designed in foreign territory; unrestricted or simplified accuracy of the reproduction; usability as a semiotic tool, thus movable; neither packaging nor Atlas, but map). From these basic conditions postulated Eco different practical implementations of a map at a scale of 1:1 and derives its unsolvable paradoxes representation. His 13 - page essay concludes with three corollaries:

• » A map at a scale of 1:1 is the only territory again inaccurate. "
• "The Kingdom is at the same moment in which to create his card, unrepresentable. "
• "Every map in 1:1 scale marked the end of the empire as such and would therefore be the map of a territory that is no longer a kingdom. "

Momo In 1973, Michael served the end of the subject and let the character Gigi tourist guide invent the story of the bully Marxentius Communus, who ordered " to produce a globe, which should be the same as the old earth and everything on the [ ... ] quite should be faithfully represented [...] ". The creation of the model consumes all the resources of the world so that the new figure is ultimately proves to be identical with the previously imaged reality, but which no longer exists.

Scientific reception of the idea

The impracticality of a map at a scale of 1:1 is obvious, yet the literary mind game also served cartographic textbooks as a starting point for viewing of maps and scales. This is to be understood that maps a graphical model of the earth, which has been obtained by measurements, and it is impossible to detect all the details of the real world to the micro level, and store data. Problems of map 1:1 are listed next to the paradoxes of Eco:

• You missed the real purpose of a map to convey namely as an aid to the viewer spatial information in the abstract but is an end in itself ..
• Although measuring technical effort, data volume and production costs rise enormously, but can the surface be described only as accurate as the measurement process allows thus always finds a generalization instead.

It also can be parallels to draw any scientific modeling, to compare Bonini paradox.