An example of the coastline paradox. If the coastline of Great Britain is measured using units 100 km (62 mi) long, then the length of the coastline is approximately 2,800 km (1,700 mi). With 50 km (31 mi) units, the total length is approximately 3,400 km (2,100 mi), approximately 600 km (370 mi) longer.

The coastline paradox is the counterintuitive observation that the coastline of a landmass does not have a well-defined length. This results from the fractal curve-like properties of coastlines, i.e., the fact that a coastline typically has a fractal dimension (which in fact makes the notion of length inapplicable). The first recorded observation of this phenomenon was by Lewis Fry Richardson[1][2] and it was expanded upon by Benoit Mandelbrot.[3][4]

The measured length of the coastline depends on the method used to measure it and the degree of cartographic generalization. Since a landmass has features at all scales, from hundreds of kilometers in size to tiny fractions of a millimeter and below, there is no obvious size of the smallest feature that should be taken into consideration when measuring, and hence no single well-defined perimeter to the landmass. Various approximations exist when specific assumptions are made about minimum feature size.

The problem is fundamentally different from the measurement of other, simpler edges. It is possible, for example, to accurately measure the length of a straight, idealized metal bar by using a measurement device to determine that the length is less than a certain amount and greater than another amount—that is, to measure it within a certain degree of uncertainty. The more accurate the measurement device, the closer results will be to the true length of the edge. When measuring a coastline, however, the closer measurement does not result in an increase in accuracy—the measurement only increases in length; unlike with the metal bar, there is no way to obtain a maximum value for the length of the coastline.

In three-dimensional space, the coastline paradox is readily extended to the concept of fractal surfaces whereby the area of a surface varies, depending on the measurement resolution.

Mathematical aspects

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

The basic concept of length originates from Euclidean distance. In Euclidean geometry, a straight line represents the shortest distance between two points. This line has only one length. On the surface of a sphere, this is replaced by the geodesic length (also called the great circle length), which is measured along the surface curve that exists in the plane containing both endpoints and the center of the sphere. The length of basic curves is more complicated but can also be calculated. Measuring with rulers, one can approximate the length of a curve by adding the sum of the straight lines which connect the points:

Using a few straight lines to approximate the length of a curve will produce an estimate lower than the true length; when increasingly short (and thus more numerous) lines are used, the sum approaches the curve's true length. A precise value for this length can be found using calculus, the branch of mathematics enabling the calculation of infinitesimally small distances. The following animation illustrates how a smooth curve can be meaningfully assigned a precise length:

Not all curves can be measured in this way. A fractal is, by definition, a curve whose complexity changes with measurement scale. Whereas approximations of a smooth curve tend to a single value as measurement precision increases, the measured value for a fractal does not converge.

This Sierpiński curve (a type of Space-filling curve), which repeats the same pattern on a smaller and smaller scale, continues to increase in length. If understood to iterate within an infinitely subdivisible geometric space, its length tends to infinity. At the same time, the area enclosed by the curve does converge to a precise figure—just as, analogously, the land mass of an island can be calculated more easily than the length of its coastline.

As the length of a fractal curve always diverges to infinity, if one were to measure a coastline with infinite or near-infinite resolution, the length of the infinitely short kinks in the coastline would add up to infinity.[5] However, this figure relies on the assumption that space can be subdivided into infinitesimal sections. The truth value of this assumption—which underlies Euclidean geometry and serves as a useful model in everyday measurement—is a matter of philosophical speculation, and may or may not reflect the changing realities of "space" and "distance" on the atomic level (approximately the scale of a nanometer). For instance, the Planck length, many orders of magnitude smaller than an atom, is proposed as the smallest measurable unit possible in the universe.

Coastlines are less definite in their construction than idealized fractals such as the Mandelbrot set because they are formed by various natural events that create patterns in statistically random ways, whereas idealized fractals are formed through repeated iterations of simple, formulaic sequences.[6]

Discovery

Shortly before 1951, Lewis Fry Richardson, in researching the possible effect of border lengths on the probability of war, noticed that the Portuguese reported their measured border with Spain to be 987 km, but the Spanish reported it as 1214 km. This was the beginning of the coastline problem, which is a mathematical uncertainty inherent in the measurement of boundaries that are irregular.[7]

The prevailing method of estimating the length of a border (or coastline) was to lay out n equal straight-line segments of length with dividers on a map or aerial photograph. Each end of the segment must be on the boundary. Investigating the discrepancies in border estimation, Richardson discovered what is now termed the "Richardson Effect": the sum of the segments is inversely proportional to the common length of the segments. In effect, the shorter the ruler, the longer the measured border; the Spanish and Portuguese geographers were simply using different-length rulers.

The result most astounding to Richardson is that, under certain circumstances, as approaches zero, the length of the coastline approaches infinity. Richardson had believed, based on Euclidean geometry, that a coastline would approach a fixed length, as do similar estimations of regular geometric figures. For example, the perimeter of a regular polygon inscribed in a circle approaches the circumference with increasing numbers of sides (and decrease in the length of one side). In geometric measure theory such a smooth curve as the circle that can be approximated by small straight segments with a definite limit is termed a rectifiable curve.

Measuring a coastline

Further information: How Long Is the Coast of Britain? Statistical Self-Similarity and Fractional Dimension

More than a decade after Richardson completed his work, Benoit Mandelbrot developed a new branch of mathematics, fractal geometry, to describe just such non-rectifiable complexes in nature as the infinite coastline.[8] His own definition of the new figure serving as the basis for his study is:[9]

I coined fractal from the Latin adjective fractus. The corresponding Latin verb frangere means "to break:" to create irregular fragments. It is therefore sensible ... that, in addition to "fragmented" ... fractus should also mean "irregular."

A key property of some fractals is self-similarity; that is, at any scale the same general configuration appears. A coastline is perceived as bays alternating with promontories. In the hypothetical situation that a given coastline has this property of self-similarity, then no matter how great any one small section of coastline is magnified, a similar pattern of smaller bays and promontories superimposed on larger bays and promontories appears, right down to the grains of sand. At that scale the coastline appears as a momentarily shifting, potentially infinitely long thread with a stochastic arrangement of bays and promontories formed from the small objects at hand. In such an environment (as opposed to smooth curves) Mandelbrot asserts[8] "coastline length turns out to be an elusive notion that slips between the fingers of those who want to grasp it."

There are different kinds of fractals. A coastline with the stated property is in "a first category of fractals, namely curves whose fractal dimension is greater than 1." That last statement represents an extension by Mandelbrot of Richardson's thought. Mandelbrot's statement of the Richardson Effect is:[10]

where L, coastline length, a function of the measurement unit, ε, is approximated by the expression. F is a constant and D is a parameter that Richardson found depended on the coastline approximated by L. He gave no theoretical explanation but Mandelbrot identified D with a non-integer form of the Hausdorff dimension, later the fractal dimension. Rearranging the right side of the expression obtains:

where Fε−D must be the number of units ε required to obtain L. The fractal dimension is the number of the dimensions of the figure being used to approximate the fractal: 0 for a dot, 1 for a line, 2 for a square. D in the expression is between 1 and 2, for coastlines typically less than 1.5. For lake shorelines, the typical value is D = 1.28.[11] The broken line measuring the coast does not extend in one direction nor does it represent an area, but is intermediate. It can be interpreted as a thick line or band of width 2ε. More broken coastlines have greater D and therefore L is longer for the same ε. Mandelbrot showed that D is independent of ε.

See also

References

Citations

  1. ^ Weisstein, Eric W. "Coastline Paradox". MathWorld.
  2. ^ Richardson, L.F. (1961). "The problem of contiguity: An appendix to statistics of deadly quarrels". General Systems Yearbook. 6. pp. 139–187.
  3. ^ Mandelbrot, B. (1967). "How Long is the Coast of Britain? Statistical Self-Similarity and Fractional Dimension". Science. 156 (3775): 636–638. Bibcode:1967Sci...156..636M. doi:10.1126/science.156.3775.636. PMID 17837158. S2CID 15662830.
  4. ^ Mandelbrot, Benoit (1983). The Fractal Geometry of Nature. W.H. Freeman and Co. 25–33. ISBN 978-0-7167-1186-5.
  5. ^ Post & Eisen, p. 550. (see below)
  6. ^ Heinz-Otto Peitgen, Hartmut Jürgens, Dietmar Saupe, Chaos and Fractals: New Frontiers of Science; Spring, 2004; p. 424.
  7. ^ Richardson, Lewis Fry (1993). "Fractals". In Ashford, Oliver M.; Charnock, H.; Drazin, P. G.; et al. (eds.). The Collected Papers of Lewis Fry Richardson: Meteorology and numerical analysis. 1. Cambridge University Press. pp. 45–46. ISBN 0-521-38297-1.
  8. ^ a b Mandelbrot 1982, p. 28.
  9. ^ Mandelbrot 1982, p. 1.
  10. ^ Mandelbrot 1982, pp. 29–31.
  11. ^ Seekell, D.; Cael, B.; Lindmark, E.; Byström, P. (2021). "The Fractal Scaling Relationship for River Inlets to Lakes". Geophysical Research Letters. 48 (9): e2021GL093366. doi:10.1029/2021GL093366. ISSN 1944-8007.

Sources