I would have been interested to learn the reason, but here is a case where an article really tells no more than its headline: there exists this paper, see, that

I would have been interested to learn the reason, but here is a case where an article really tells no more than its headline: there exists this paper, see, that explains why the universe has three dimensions. It's a shame, because as I was reading the article, I was impressed by how well it was putting technical matters into plain English. It's just that I was also anticipating getting to the juicy details, which it never did. Oh, okay, I thought, I guess I'll go try to read the scientific paper itself. When I clicked to the paper, though, all I got was an abstract, even shorter than the article that I came from. To read the full article, I must subscribe to the journal. I have nothing against that --- unless the research was publicly funded. Anyway, I just thought it was funny that the article was nothing but an exquisitely written segue, with no real content beyond its headline. On the other hand, had I got to the real content, I likely would not have understood it, because the reason that the universe is three dimensions is probably: math.