Skip to main content

Geodetic Boundary Value Problem: the Equivalence between Molodensky’s and Helmert’s Solutions

  • Book
  • © 2017

Overview

  • Shows for the first time the theoretical equivalence of the various geodetic boundary value problems, with and without terrain reductions
  • Offers a rigorous, alternative interpretation of the usual downward continuation approach as a change of boundary approach
  • Provides the theoretical foundations for why the improperly posed downward continuation method has produced reasonable results in many practical applications of geoid/quasi-geoid determination
  • Includes supplementary material: sn.pub/extras

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Earth Sciences (BRIEFSEARTH)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this book

eBook USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Other ways to access

Licence this eBook for your library

Institutional subscriptions

Table of contents (8 chapters)

Keywords

About this book

This book offers a new approach to interpreting the geodetic boundary value problem, successfully obtaining the solutions of the Molodensky and Stokes boundary value problems (BVPs) with the help of downward continuation (DC) based methods. Although DC is known to be an improperly posed operation, classical methods seem to provide numerically sensible results, and therefore it can be concluded that such classical methods must in fact be manifestations of different, mathematically sound approaches.

Here, the authors first prove the equivalence of Molodensky’s and Stoke's approaches with Helmert’s reduction in terms of both BVP formulation and BVP solutions by means of the DC method. They then go on to show that this is not merely a downward continuation operation, and provide more rigorous interpretations of the DC approach as a change of boundary approach and as a pseudo BVP solution approach.

Authors and Affiliations

  • Politecnico di Milano - Polo Territoriale di Como, Como, Italy

    Fernando Sansò

  • Department of Geomatics Engineering, Schulich School of Engineering, Calgary, Canada

    Michael G. Sideris

Bibliographic Information

Publish with us