> You never made it clear that was your problem with it. Just to be clear, the problem was not with my intuition about temperature. The problem was trying to p

> You never made it clear that was your problem with it. Just to be clear, the problem was not with my intuition about temperature. The problem was trying to put toghether "all those configurations with no particles near the thermometer -which may be very concentrated or not at all- have the same entropy" and "the entropy is lower the more concentrated the particles". For example I wrote two days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33206422 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33206422 "In every single initial configuration the particles will be at some distance from the thermometer and will cause it to read 0 according to you reasoning (until some time passes). I guess they all correspond to the same "absolute zero macrostate". What I still don't see is how do you calculate the entropy using Gibbs entropy formula in such a way that the entropy is lower or higher for some initial configuration depending on the position of the particles." Or somewhere up this thread I said very clearly "The balls don’t touch the thermometer in either case. You seemed to imply that the higher concentration means a different macrostate with lower entropy." and you insisted that "Yes. The higher concentration has a lower probability of occurring. And occupies a different temperature reading on the thermometer. Each temperature reading is a different macrostate." It's not my fault that you insisted that the higher concentration has a lower probability of occurring and occupies a different temperature reading on the thermometer even when I was clearly talking about what you say is the same macrostate with the same temperature.