Why is a 3D universe more energetically favorable than a 2D one?

Testing out latex. Don't mind me.

E &= \frac{mc^2}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}

>>8292397
[latex]E &= \frac{mc^2}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[\latex]

[math]E &= \frac{mc^2}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[\math]

>>8292404
[math], F▲M

[math]E &= \frac{mc^2}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[/math]

>>8292410
>>8292414
What am I doing wrong?

[math]{E &= \frac{mc^2}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}}[/math]

>>8292409
/math
[math]f = \Delta m[/math]

[math][E &= \frac{mc^2}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}][/math]

>>8292387
>The math looks so simple for 2D models

subjective

[math]E = \frac{mc^2}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[/math]

>>8292387
>Why is a 3D universe
>implying it isn't an nD universe

>>8292433
>tons of problems can be analytically solved in 2d but not in 3d
>generally neater expressions
Stay autistic!

>>8292451
>solved by humans
>relevant or objective

>>8292459
I didn't mean it literally anon, but I guess that's a bit difficult (subjective) for you to grasp.

The universe is 11d actually

File: latex tutorial.png (243KB, 3600x1300px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 3600x1300px

>>8292419