Control

Control is a fundamental term of Fauceir Theory. Control is an elementary process defined as any change in outcome of an other process that is different from a mere random one.
This definition implies:

1. control can only be defined statistically,
2. control is controlled or in other words may be subdivided into more elementary control processes as all fauceirs are nested by definition.

This definition is in contrast to the common definition of control for two aspects.

1. In colloquial language, the term control is biased. We use to call the desired outcome the controlled one and the not desired outcome is the uncontrolled; or it is even called an accident.
2. In control theory, the term control is rather confined to a system that maintains a certain state. In fauceir theory this is rather called regulation as it involves feedback and hence a chain of control processes.These points represent special cases that are discussed below.

Thought experiment

The essence of fauceir control is illustrated in the following pictures. The first picture shows an abstract experiment without control. When the blue balls rain down both funnels A and B will receive the same amount as the clouds are identical.

[Error: Wrong macro arguments: "ControlNo" for macro 'img' (maybe wrong macro tag syntax?)]

... while in the second one some control is exerted by the tilted bar. Although the clouds are still identical the A funnel will receive more blue balls as the bar directs some of the balls above the B funnel to the A funnel. The probabilities p(A) and p(B) are identical to the number of balls in funnel A and B respectively.

[Error: Wrong macro arguments: "ControlYes" for macro 'img' (maybe wrong macro tag syntax?)]

Graphical representation

The first graph shows a process that has mainly tree possible outcomes. Without control the outcome b2 is most likely.

The second graph shows the same process that again has the same tree possible outcomes. With control the outcome b1 is most likely.

Nihilism and Fauceir Theory

There is a philosophical tenet around that not only strictly denies teleology but even denies all kinds of meaning in nature an thinking. That's nihilism. Some authors claim Darwin's theory being nihilistic[Error: Wrong macro arguments: "4903" for macro 'ref' (maybe wrong macro tag syntax?)] . I think this is much too far fetched and even some kind of wishful thinking.

The nihilistic arguments can be summarized as follows. As natural selection acts upon randomly distributed traits, evolution has no goal and has no meaning at all. In their view evolution can be compared with a random walk, the outcome uncertain. But is this actually the case?

I think not. Such nihilistic views are contrary to our empirical observation of increasing complexity with the advancement of evolution.

1. Random forces rather demolish than build complexity.
2. Natural selection is not a random but a control process. (See the fauceir generalization of control)

Nihilism is typical of periods of scientific stagnation. It is triggered psychologically. It is part of our human inboard self defense mechanism that allows us to let go what cannot be changed anymore. Evolutionary theory for decades or even a century is characterized by such a stagnation as evolutionary biologists fail to explain the increasing complexity.

Fauceir theory by far is not nihilistic. It explains the progress in evolution as a result of a limited set of rules. But as fauceir theory assumes progress as the goal of evolution, it does not mean Fauceir Theory is teleological. A ball is rolling downhill because gravity is pulling it, and so evolutionary progress is the result of a gravity like force that can be defined and even measured.

[Error: Macro 'references' doesn't exist]