What is it about?
The idea that geographical distances are often misunderstood in scientific literature is proved by an analysis of scientific --mainly geographic and economic-- literature. The key property of metrics for spatiality is triangle inequality (TI), which is closely related to the distance optimality. We identify three different situations where several authors identify violations of TI.We consider two of them to be errors of interpretation. The first error consists in considering sub-optimal measurements as distances. Yet distances are necessarily optimal if they obey TI. The second set of errors, which is the most widespread, entails a confusion between the Euclidean straight line and the shortest path. The errors lie in treating a detour as a violation of TI, whereas this situation simply corresponds to a non-Euclidean distance. The third problem concerns the additivity of distances. The commonplace situation in geographical space where a break is needed to provide the energy necessary to renew movement, is considered by some authors as another violation of TI. We argue that if these routes are optimal, TI should hold.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
Distance is a central concept in geography and is a key concept in economics. Its correct understanding is hence a fundamental work for these disciplines.
Perspectives
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Misunderstanding geographical distances: two errors and an issue in the interpretation of violations of triangle inequality, Cybergeo, November 2016, OpenEdition,
DOI: 10.4000/cybergeo.27810.
You can read the full text:
Resources
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page