Dehn's solution to Hilbert's 3rd: 1901 or 1902? - MathOverflow most recent 30 from http://mathoverflow.net2013-05-20T03:15:27Zhttp://mathoverflow.net/feeds/question/73681http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdfhttp://mathoverflow.net/questions/73681/dehns-solution-to-hilberts-3rd-1901-or-1902Dehn's solution to Hilbert's 3rd: 1901 or 1902?Joseph O'Rourke2011-08-25T18:06:16Z2011-08-25T22:26:48Z
<p>This is a simple bibliographic request that I have been unable to pin down. Max Dehn's
solution to Hilbert's 3rd problem is:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Max Dehn, "Über den Rauminhalt." <em>Mathematische Annalen</em> <b>55</b> (190x), no. 3, pages 465–478.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It is variously cited as either 1901 or 1902 (but always volume 55; Hilbert's own footnote
cites volume 55 "soon to appear"). E.g.,</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://mathworld.wolfram.com/DehnInvariant.html" rel="nofollow">Mathworld</a> cites it as 1902.</li>
<li>The <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=WHjO9K6xEm4C&pg=PA613&lpg=PA613&dq=%2522%25C3%259Cber+den+Rauminhalt.%2522+Math.+Ann.+55,+465-478,+1902.&source=bl&ots=wbRTx7whWt&sig=qKQh4tITFtoBltGTIFKZIsphIw4&hl=en&ei=SYlWTqfSOMXbgQfoptWbDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CEEQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow">Encyclopedic Dictionary of Mathematics</a> cites it as 1902.</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert%2527s_third_problem" rel="nofollow">Wikipedia</a> says 1901.</li>
<li>Various papers, e.g., <a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/math/9712226" rel="nofollow">this one</a>, and <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/57582107/12/Bibliography" rel="nofollow">Tao's book</a>, cite it as 1901.</li>
</ul>
<p>I have been unsuccessful in finding the definitive year via the web, because of all
the conflicting citations. The next step is to retrieve
<em>Mathematische Annalen</em> volume 55, but perhaps someone can spare me that trouble...?
Thanks!</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/73681/dehns-solution-to-hilberts-3rd-1901-or-1902/73695#73695Answer by Carlo Beenakker for Dehn's solution to Hilbert's 3rd: 1901 or 1902?Carlo Beenakker2011-08-25T19:09:43Z2011-08-25T19:15:22Z<p>the journal has been scanned and can be read here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.archive.org/details/mathematischean33behngoog" rel="nofollow">http://www.archive.org/details/mathematischean33behngoog</a></p>
<p>volume 55 has four issues, covering both years 1901 and 1902; that is where the confusion comes from; Dehn's article is from the third issue, published in September 1901.</p>
<p>you can read the table of contents here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.springerlink.com/content/0025-5831/55/3/" rel="nofollow">http://www.springerlink.com/content/0025-5831/55/3/</a></p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/73681/dehns-solution-to-hilberts-3rd-1901-or-1902/73696#73696Answer by Andreas Thom for Dehn's solution to Hilbert's 3rd: 1901 or 1902?Andreas Thom2011-08-25T19:12:41Z2011-08-25T19:12:41Z<p>Dehn, M.; Ueber den Rauminhalt. (German) Math. Ann. 55 (1901), no. 3, 465–478</p>
<p>according to MathSciNet and Springer confirms this <a href="http://www.springerlink.com/content/0025-5831/55/3/" rel="nofollow">here</a>. But on the scanned original provided by the Göttingen Center for Digitalisation <a href="http://gdz.sub.uni-goettingen.de/dms/load/img/?PPN=PPN235181684_0055" rel="nofollow">here</a>, the bottom line of the first page shows 1902. However, this refers to all issues of Volume 55. Looking more closely, only issues 1-3 were published in 1901 and issue 4 was published in 1902.</p>
<p>I guess, this means that MathSciNet is correct. However, the confusion is somewhat understandable.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/73681/dehns-solution-to-hilberts-3rd-1901-or-1902/73706#73706Answer by John Stillwell for Dehn's solution to Hilbert's 3rd: 1901 or 1902?John Stillwell2011-08-25T22:26:48Z2011-08-25T22:26:48Z<p>Another point to consider is whether "Über den Rauminhalt"
is in fact Dehn's first solution to Hilbert's 3rd Problem. I
believe his first solution was in the paper "Über raumgleiche
Polyeder" in the <em>Nachrichten der Königliche Gesellschaft der
Wissenschaften zu Göttingen</em> of 1900, pp. 345 -- 354.</p>