With a name like Dr. Stochastic, you come up with this? C'mon, doc.... Suppose there's a configuration C(t), subjected to a random process. Are you really gonna make the claim that you know C(t+1) with probability=1? Because that's what your comment seems to be saying.
No. That's not what I said. I said that the configuration C(t+1) has the same entropy whether or not it is obtained from C(t) by random or non-random processes.