-- 79 --

Now imagine a universe in which the laws of physics are as parochial as local culture—changing unpredictably from place to place
and defiantly resisting any outside influence to conform. Like the adventures of Gulliver, travels in such a world would expose you
to an enormously rich array of unpredictable experiences. But from a physicist's perspective, this is yet another nightmare. It's hard
enough, for instance, to live with the fact that laws that are valid in one country—or even one state—may not be valid in another.
But imagine what things would be like if the laws of nature were as varied. In such a world experiments carried out in one locale
would have no bearing on the physical laws relevant somewhere else. Instead, physicists would have to redo experiments over and
over again in different locations to probe the local laws of nature that hold in each. Thankfully, everything we know points toward
the laws of physics being the same everywhere. All experiments the world over converge on the same set of underlying physical
explanations. Moreover, our ability to explain a vast number of astrophysical observations of far-flung regions of the cosmos using
one, fixed set of physical principles leads us to believe that the same laws do hold true everywhere. Having never traveled to the
opposite end of the universe, we can't definitively rule out the possibility that a whole new kind of physics prevails elsewhere, but
everything points to the contrary.

Again, this does not mean that the universe looks the same—or has the same detailed properties—in different locations. An
astronaut jumping on a pogo stick on the moon can do all sorts of things that are impossible to do on earth. But we recognize that
the difference arises because the moon is far less massive than the earth; it does not mean that the law of gravity is somehow
changing from place to place. Newton's, or more precisely, Einstein's, law of gravity is the same on earth as it is on the moon. The
difference in the astronaut's experience is one of change in environmental detail, not variation of physical law.

Physicists describe these two properties of physical laws—that they do not depend on when or where you use them—as symmetries
of nature. By this usage physicists mean that nature treats every moment in time and every location in space identically—
symmetrically—by ensuring that the same fundamental laws are in operation. Much in the same manner that they affect art and
music, such symmetries are deeply satisfying; they highlight an order and a coherence in the workings of nature. The elegance of
rich, complex, and diverse phenomena emerging from a simple set of universal laws is at least part of what physicists mean when
they invoke the term "beautiful."

In our discussions of the special and general theories of relativity, we came upon yet other symmetries of nature. Recall that the
principle of relativity, which lies at the heart of special relativity, tells us that all physical laws must be the same regardless of the
constant-velocity relative motion that individual observers might experience. This is a symmetry because it means that nature treats
all such observers identically—symmetrically. Each such observer is justified in considering himself or herself to be at rest. Again,
it's not that observers in relative motion will make identical observations; as we have seen earlier, there are all sorts of stunning
differences in their observations. Instead, like the disparate experiences of the pogo-stick enthusiast on the earth and on the moon,
the differences in observations reflect environmental details—the observers are in relative motion—even though their observations
are governed by identical laws.

Through the equivalence principle of general relativity, Einstein significantly extended this symmetry by showing that the laws of
physics are actually identical for all observers, even if they are undergoing complicated accelerated motion. Recall that Einstein
accomplished this by realizing that an accelerated observer is also perfectly justified in declaring himself or herself to be at rest,
and in claiming that the force he or she feels is due to a gravitational field. Once gravity is included in the framework, all possible
observational vantage points are on a completely equal footing. Beyond the intrinsic aesthetic appeal of this egalitarian treatment of
all motion, we have seen that these symmetry principles played a pivotal role in the stunning conclusions regarding gravity that
Einstein found.

Are there any other symmetry principles having to do with space, time, and motion that the laws of nature should respect? If you
think about this you might come up with one more possibility. The laws of physics should not care about the angle from which you
make your observations. For instance, if you perform some experiment and then decide to rotate all of your equipment and do the
experiment again, the same laws should apply. This is known as rotational symmetry, and it means that the laws of physics treat all
possible orientations on equal footing. It is a symmetry principle that is on par with the previous ones discussed.

Are there others? Have we overlooked any symmetries? You might suggest the gauge symmetries associated with the
nongravitational forces, as discussed in Chapter 5. These are certainly symmetries of nature, but they are of a more abstract sort;
our focus here is on symmetries that have a direct link to space, time, or motion. With this stipulation, it's now likely that you can't
think of any other possibilities. In fact, in 1967 physicists Sidney Coleman and Jeffrey Mandula were able to prove that no other
symmetries associated with space, time, or motion could be combined with those just discussed and result in a theory bearing any
resemblance to our world.