Originally Posted By: socratus
Somebody wrote : 1-D is simpler than 2-D.
The answer.
The 1-D figure is explained by "theory of string-particle".
The result is written in the book "The trouble with Physics" by Lee Smolin.

#
Other wrote: a triangle is simpler than circle.
The answer.
The triangle has angles.
To create angles needs some kind of forces.
Without forces every flat geometrical figure would change into circle.
==..

More details.

Somebody wrote : 1-D is simpler than 2-D.
The answer.
The 1-D ( line with Planck's length but without thickness) is explained
by "theory of string-particle". Theorists try to understand 1-D string in 11-D.
The result is written in the book "The trouble with Physics" by Lee Smolin.
In the others words:
Where is Alice?
Alice is in the 1-D String, at 11-D Wonderland.

#
Other wrote: a triangle is simpler than circle.
The argument.
To make a triangle is needed to apply force at three different locations.
To make a circle is needed to apply force at all locations.
Therefore " a triangle is simpler than circle."
The refutation.
To apply " force at all locations " means that the particle
is in an equilibrium state . . . . in relax state . . . in potential state.
The equilibrium is primary state of particle.
To change equilibrium needs forces.
For example:
To create line needs forces in two different directions.
To create triangle needs forces in three different directions. . . . etc
Without forces every flat particle will change into a symmetrical
equilibrium - circle state: c/d=pi=3,14 . . . .
==.