Final answer:
It is false that more important objects always appear larger on a map, as the size on a map usually corresponds to real-world dimensions based on the map's scale, though symbols representing importance may be exceptions.
Step-by-step explanation:
In general, it is false that more important objects appear larger on a map. Maps are graphical representations of the world, and while sometimes a map might feature larger symbols for more significant or important locations (like a capital city), size on a map often corresponds to actual size or area on the ground, not importance. Maps use a specific scale to represent the proportional sizes of real-world objects, naturally leading to a situation where larger objects in reality will usually appear larger on the map, irrespective of their importance.
For instance, in the context of physical geography, a large mountain range will likely be depicted as taking up more space on a map than a smaller forest, even if both are considered important in their own rights. Conversely, a small historic site might be marked with an enlarged symbol to highlight its location, but the symbol does not represent the actual size of the site. Cartographers might indeed decide to enlarge the graphical representations (symbols) of some locations or objects due to their significance, but this does not generally make them 'larger on the map' in a strict sense.
Therefore, the representation size on maps can sometimes be influenced by importance, but this is not the standard mapping convention and the overall answer is false.