Abstract:In 1907, Henry Ernest Dudeney posed a puzzle: ``cut any equilateral triangle \dots\ into as few pieces as possible that will fit together and form a perfect square'' (without overlap, via translation and rotation). Four weeks later, Dudeney demonstrated a beautiful four-piece solution, which today remains perhaps the most famous example of a dissection. In this paper (over a century later), we finally solve Dudeney's puzzle, by proving that the equilateral triangle and square have no common dissection with three or fewer polygonal pieces. We reduce the problem to the analysis of a discrete graph structure representing the correspondence between the edges and vertices of the pieces forming each polygon, using ideas from common unfolding.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

### What problem does this paper attempt to solve? This paper aims to solve a century - old geometric problem: **Prove that Dudeney's four - piece solution is the optimal solution**, that is, it is impossible to splice an equilateral triangle and a square with three or fewer polygons. Specifically, the paper focuses on the following issues: 1. **Historical background**: - In 1907, Henry Ernest Dudeney proposed a puzzle: How to cut an equilateral triangle into as few pieces as possible and form a square by translating and rotating these pieces. - Four weeks later, Dudeney showed a beautiful four - piece solution, which is still considered one of the most famous examples in this type of problem today. 2. **Research objectives**: - More than a century later, the authors attempt to finally solve Dudeney's puzzle by proving that there is no common splicing scheme of three or fewer polygon pieces between the equilateral triangle and the square. - They simplify the problem to analyze the discrete graph structure representing the correspondence between the edges and vertices of each polygon, using ideas from unfolding theory. 3. **Main conclusions**: - The main contribution of the paper is to give the first non - trivial optimality proof, proving that the famous four - piece solution (as shown in Figure 1) is indeed unimprovable. - Specifically, they prove that, without allowing the flipping of pieces, there is no scheme to splice an equilateral triangle and a square with three or fewer polygon pieces. 4. **Research methods**: - The authors first rule out the possibility of a two - piece solution (see Lemma 2.2), and then focus on proving the impossibility of a three - piece solution. - They gradually narrow down the feasible cutting methods by classifying the cutting methods of each polygon and listing the cutting combinations that may produce a three - piece solution. - Finally, they apply the concept of matching graphs to show that all remaining combinations are infeasible. In conclusion, this paper solves the geometric puzzle proposed by Dudeney and provides a strict mathematical proof, indicating that the four - piece solution is the optimal solution. This not only provides an important theoretical basis for geometric splicing problems, but also provides new ideas for further research in related fields.

Dudeney's Dissection is Optimal

An enumeration of equilateral triangle dissections

Hinged Dissections Exist

On inside-out Dissections of Polygons and Polyhedra

Ferromagnetic transition in a double-exchange system with alloy disorder

Generalized Dissections and Monsky's Theorem

Equidissections of darts

Square Trisection

Orthogonal dissection into few rectangles

Partitioning a Polygon Into Small Pieces

Counting quiddities of polygon dissections

A Generalization of Montucla's Rectangle-to-Rectangle Dissection to Higher Dimensions

On Dividing a Rectangle

Happy Ending: An Empty Hexagon in Every Set of 30 Points

Commutative Properties of Schubert Puzzles with Convex Polygonal Boundary Shapes

On Optimal Point Sets Determining Distinct Triangles

Decompositions of a rectangle into non-congruent rectangles of equal area

Acutely Triangulated, Stacked, and Very Ununfoldable Polyhedra

Pictorial and Apictorial Polygonal Jigsaw Puzzles from Arbitrary Number of Crossing Cuts

There is no perfect Mondrian partition for squares of side lengths less than 1001

Perfectly Packing an Equilateral Triangle by Equilateral Triangles of Sidelengths