>To ask the same question in yet another way, Is Entropy like C to the majority? If it appears to decrease, it's our understanding of probabilities for the syst

>To ask the same question in yet another way, Is Entropy like C to the majority? If it appears to decrease, it's our understanding of probabilities for the system that need to be reworked? The popular intuition of entropy is often wrong and incomplete. The most general definition is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_(information_theory) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_(information_theory) You will see it is inline with what I'm talking about. Entropy is an arbitrary concept defined relative to your choice of a system (entities axioms and theorems) and arbitrary macrostates and arbitary microstates defined for the system. Nobody has this down, they all talk about entropy without defining what kind of entropy they're talking about. Usually it's a half baked definition involving temperature and conservation of energy. In general when you add conservation of energy into your system, microstates and macrostates then it becomes more inline with the popular notion of entropy. Because for atoms to self organize into planets they must stop moving, but because of conservation of energy that motion must be transferred into something else. So in general self organization in one part of the universe must mean another part of the universe gets hotter. If I define a macrostate and microstate to account for conservation of energy meaning that my microstate must make sure that if a particle stops moving another one must start moving then things usually fits the notion of getting more disordered over time. If I define the microstate to be just the position of atoms then things appear to become ordered over time as the position of atoms coalesce into spheres. So there's different perspectives on it and all perspectives are true. It's just one perspective is examining the phenomenon of conservation of energy the other is not.