Whether the same amount of energy is applied to a system in a random burst or with deliberation and slowness makes no difference to the product unless you factor other variables, in which case you are measuring >those variables< by the difference in product. 5=5 1+1+1+1+1=5 It took a fraction of a second longer to validate the latter string of numbers, but 5 remains equal to 5 no matter how many times you circle the roundabout. At the end of the day, Hammer strikes versus bomb blast or RG machine versus pile of junk is completely irrelevant to the entropy of the system when the total microstates are equivalent.<quoted text>
And if you want to see the entropy picture of the end products, you have to look at ALL the end products which includes the amount of entropy added to the heat sink in both processes. See you dont just have a house and a bombsite. In each case you have what is onsite PLUS whatever has been added to the surroundings. You have to account for all the energy applied and where it has ended up in each process. And whichever process has generated the most heat has generated the most entropy, as i have been saying right from the start.
For all your digressions, that simple fact is still true whether you use the clausius or the boltzmann approach to solving it.
Urb insists that an equal amount of wood and steel has greater entropy if it has been sawed into 2x4's and mulch and assembled in just-such-a-way than if it is a dead tree and a heap of nails. Anyone else would realize that the form doesn't matter - they are in every aspect except shape and distribution exactly the same thing. His entire argument revolves around an arbitrarily specific and preferential interpretation of "order" (aka "better", aka portable goalpost) that >must< include artificial manipulation and beneficial to the agenda. He would be the art critic who fawns over accidentally spilled paint as a masterwork, until he finds it was not spilled by Jackson Pollock.