I don't think an non-equi-distant axis spacing is correctly visualised atm. This gif shows the same simulation but run on different grids, neither of them are equi-distant in latitude
At lower resolution the latitudes of these grids are almost equi-distant but not quite
julia> RingGrids.get_latd(OctaminimalGaussianGrid, 4)
8-element Vector{Float64}:
73.79921362856322
52.81294318999426
31.704091745007943
10.569882312576098
-10.569882312576098
-31.704091745007943
-52.81294318999426
-73.79921362856324
julia> RingGrids.get_latd(OctaHEALPixGrid, 4)
7-element Vector{Float64}:
69.63586519368219
48.59037789072914
25.944479772370016
0.0
-25.944479772370016
-48.59037789072914
-69.63586519368219
or visualised
So Gaussian latitudes actually approach to being equidistant except near the poles, but the OctaHEALPix grid has latitudes some 25% further spread near the equator but 10% or so less near the poles
I don't think an non-equi-distant axis spacing is correctly visualised atm. This gif shows the same simulation but run on different grids, neither of them are equi-distant in latitude
At lower resolution the latitudes of these grids are almost equi-distant but not quite
or visualised
So Gaussian latitudes actually approach to being equidistant except near the poles, but the OctaHEALPix grid has latitudes some 25% further spread near the equator but 10% or so less near the poles