History
Equidecomposability is also known as scissors congruence. Although it is believed that Euclid knew about equidecomposability, a theorem was not developed and proven until the early 1800's. Wolfgang Bolyai initiated the question as to whether or not polygons are equidecomposable, and in 1833, it was proven by P. Gerwien. This theorem is known as the Bolyai-Gerwien Theorem. It was later noted that William Wallace had actually proven equidecomposibility before Gerwien, in 1807. Thus, another name for this theorem is the Wallce-Bolyai-Gerwien Theorem.

The Wallace-Bolyai-Gerwien Theorem states that two polygon which have equal area are equidecomposable. Along with the theorem, we have the following five lemmas.

An interesting point about this theorem, is that the term polygon refers to not only simple closed figures, but also more complex polygons, such as figures with "holes".

Although this theorem is correct for 2 dimensions, it does not hold for three dimensions. The question of the three dimensional equidecomposability is known as Hilbert's Third Problem. Hilbert posed this problem in 1900, and shortly after, Dehn proved that equidecomposability does not always hold for three dimensional figures.

Since the early 1800's, equidecomposability has become part of what is known as recreational mathematics. Once it was discovered that different types of polygons could be dissected and their pieces rearranged to form other polygons, the question of minimal dissection was posed.

Here is a list of the number of pieces needed for certain regualr polygons to form other regular polygons. It is important to note that the minimum number of pieces is an open question for each type of regular polygon. Therefore, some of the minimums may have recently changed from what is printed here.
 

Original Polygon New Polygon Number of Pieces
Square Triangle 4
Pentagon Triangle 6
Square 6
Hexagon Triangle 5
Square 5
Pentagon 7
Heptagon Triangle 8
Square 7
Pentagon 9
Hexagon 8
Octagon Triangle 7
Square 5
Pentagon 9
Hexagon 8
Heptagon 11
Enneagon Triangle 8
Square 9
Pentagon 12
Hexagon 11
Heptagon 14
Octagon 13
Decagon Triangle 7
Square 7
Pentagon 10
Hexagon 9
Heptagon 11
Octagon 10
Enneagon 13
Dodecagon Triangle 8
Square 6
Pentagon 10
Hexagon 6
Heptagon 11
Octagon 10
Enneagon 14
Decagon 12
Golden Rectangle Triangle 4
Square 3
Pentagon 6
Hexagon 5
Heptagon 7
Octagon 6
Enneagon 9
Decagon 6
Dodecagon 7
Greek Cross Triangle 5
Square 4
Pentagon 7
Hexagon 7
Heptagon 9
Octagon 9
Enneagon 12
Decagon 10
Dodecagon 6
Golden Rectangle 5
Latin Cross Triangle 5
Square 5
Pentagon 8
Hexagon 6
Heptagon 8
Octagon 8
Enneagon 11
Decagon 10
Dodecagon 7
Golden Rectangle 5
Greek Cross 7
Maltese Cross Square 7
Hexagon 14
Greek Cross 8
Swastika Square 6
Hexagon 12
Greek Cross 8
Maltese Cross 9
Pentagram Triangle 7
Square 7
Pentagon 9
Hexagon 9
Heptagon 11
Octagon 10
Enneagon 14
Decagon 6
Dodecagon 12
Golden Rectangle 7
Greek Cross 10
Latin Cross 10
Hexagram Triangle 5
Square 5
Pentagon 8
Hexagon 6
Heptagon 9
Octagon 8
Enneagon 11
Decagon 9
Dodecagon 9
Golden Rectangle 5
Greek Cross 8
Latin Cross 8
Pentagram 11
Octagram Triangle 8
Square 8
Pentagon 9
Hexagon 9
Heptagon 12
Octagon 6
Enneagon 13
Decagon 12
Dodecagon 12
Golden Rectangle 7
Greek Cross 10
Latin Cross 11
Pentagram 13
Hexagram 10

In addition to minimal number of pieces, another current aspect of equidecomposability is puzzles containing several polygons. These puzzles will have several polygons already dissected and the person playing the puzzle must figure out how to put the pieces back together to form a certain polygon.

Overall, this topic in mathematics is fairly new and has become popular only recently. As time goes on, mathematicians are discovering new ways to dissect polygons, and with fewer pieces.

1