>>5730019>>voltage is converted to ampsIt isn't. You apply a voltage and a current proportional to that voltage flows, but that doesn't mean you're converting one to the other, it's just cause and effect.
>>if the source device needs more OR less amps then [sic] the voltage the difference would be ohms/cmI don't even know where to start on this one. Sources "needing more or less amps"? Jesus christ.
Also, resistance per metre isn't the same as resistivity, they have different units. The latter is independent of cross-sectional area, it's a property of a material rather than a property of a wire with a certain gauge. Look it up.
>>Also even if one is more power hungry then the other, if there [sic] not set up in a series then it really shouldn't matter. Resistance isn't the same as "power-hungriness". If you put zero resistance in series with finite resistance... that's not any different from just wiring up a finite resistance normally by itself. The "zero resistance" here is just a wire, remember?
That changes when you put a zero resistance in parallel with the finite resistance. Current favors the path of least resistance in a parallel arrangement, so the resistor is effectively bypassed, and also the circuit has zero resistance between the left and right terminals.
>>Ur point is useless because ur the one setting it all up, its ur own problem even if your [sic] right. Putting the source device in that position in the first place causes the problemsHe said that the circuit isn't closed, so current can't flow. But It does have a closed loop, so that is false. There aren't any sources to drive a current, though. Inserting a source in the loop to show that current will flow around the loop doesn't "cause problems".
The other perspective is that external stuff is supposed to be connected to the left/right terminals, which is clearly the intention of the designer. Lots of circuits are drawn with protruding left/right terminals with this intention.
