It’s a common perception reinforced by many world maps: Greenland looks massive, almost comparable to Africa in size. This visual distortion, primarily due to the Mercator projection used in many popular maps, also affects our understanding of other landmass sizes. But have you ever considered how the size of England truly stacks up against a vast country like the United States? You might be surprised to discover the reality beyond the map.
We often see world maps in classrooms, online, and in atlases, but these representations are inherently flawed when it comes to accurately portraying area. To represent the spherical Earth on a flat surface, cartographers employ projections, each with its own set of distortions. The Mercator projection, while excellent for navigation due to its preservation of angles, significantly distorts the size of countries, especially those further from the equator. This distortion leads to misconceptions about the relative sizes of nations.
To truly grasp the scale, we can turn to tools like The True Size, a web application designed to accurately compare the real surface areas of countries. Using such tools reveals some striking comparisons.
Fig. 1: A world map using the Mercator projection, widely used in online mapping, demonstrates how landmass sizes are distorted, particularly at higher latitudes, making areas like Greenland and Canada appear larger than they are in reality. [Credit: D. Strebe/Wikimedia commons]
So, how does England measure up against the United States? England, while a significant and historically influential country, is geographically much smaller than the USA. In fact, the United States is approximately 35 times larger than England in terms of total area. To put it another way, you could fit approximately 35 Englands into the landmass of the United States.
This stark difference in size is often masked by the Mercator projection. On a Mercator map, England might appear visually more prominent relative to the US than it actually is in reality. The projection stretches areas at higher latitudes, making countries like England, which is located further north than much of the contiguous United States, appear larger than their proportional size compared to countries closer to the equator.
Fig. 2: Illustration of the Mercator projection method. The Earth’s surface is mathematically projected onto a cylinder, which is then unrolled to create a flat map. This process inherently distorts area, especially away from the equator. [Credit: National Atlas of the United States]
The Mercator projection, depicted in Figure 2, projects the Earth onto a cylinder. This cylindrical projection, while preserving local shapes and angles, leads to area distortion, particularly as you move towards the poles. This is why Greenland appears so enormous and why, to a lesser extent, countries like England might seem larger relative to equatorial nations than they are in true area.
Despite the size distortions, the Mercator projection remains widely used, especially in online mapping services like Google Maps. This is not because of a desire to misrepresent country sizes, but because the Mercator projection excels at preserving angles. For local navigation and city-level mapping, maintaining accurate angles is crucial – perpendicular streets will remain perpendicular on a Mercator map. This is more important for street-level directions than accurate area representation.
In conclusion, while maps are essential tools, it’s crucial to remember that all flat maps inherently involve distortions. When comparing the size of England to the United States, the true scale reveals a significant difference – the US dwarfs England by a factor of roughly 35. Understanding map projections and their limitations allows us to move beyond visual misrepresentations and appreciate the true geographical proportions of our world. To get an accurate sense of country sizes, always consider consulting tools designed for true-size comparisons rather than relying solely on standard world maps.
