Those claw games are such a trap. Most of them are rigged so that when the claw pulls up, it'll automatically loosen its grip before it reaches the drop-off point.
Too bad proving it will just get you in more trouble than its worth.
Hmm, I'd toss in silly notes for fun decoding each of them in Ohms, but without the typical gold ±5%, or silver ±10% tolerance 4th bands, I can't tell which direction they're meant to be read in. I guess the other colors do have values for the 4th band (TIL), but that doesn't help with ordering.
Boy, been a while since I've played with electronics.
There is a second way to determine the reading direction of a resistor and that's to look at the placement of the rings.
Comparing the placement of the first and the last ring on a resistor, one of them should be noticeably closer to the wire. That ring is the first ring.
If there is a tolerance ring, it should be spaced apart from the other rings.
Though this doesn't always work depending on the manufacturer, and in the case of this post both the real resistors and the girls cannot be oriented this way. If the tolerance band is absent, the resistor has a 20% tolerance.
The third way is to go the doublecheck route and grab the tables of E series and cross-reference the numbers to check for valid values.
Taking the girl in the center as an example: From top to bottom it's ORANGE YELLOW VIOLET RED, which can be read as either:
NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER MULTIPLIER (no tolerance band which means ±20%)
3 4 7 × 10^2 ± 20%
2 7 4 × 10^3 ± 20%
NUMBER NUMBER MULTIPLIER TOLERANCE
3 4 × 10^7 ± 2%
2 7 × 10^4 ± 0.05%
Checking them one at the time: 3 4 7 × 10^2 ± 20%: A resistor with a tolerance of 20% or more (E6 or E3) can only have two significant digits. And there is no 3.47 in this series. INVALID 2 7 4 × 10^3 ± 20%: Same reason as above. Too many digits and 2.74 does not exist. INVALID 3 4 × 10^7 ± 2%: The 2% series (E48) needs a third digit. There is no 3.40 in this series though there is a 3.48. INVALID 2 7 × 10^4 ± 0.05%: The 0.5% series (E192) needs a third digit. There is no 2.70 in this series though there is a 2.71. INVALID
Conclusion: those resistors do not exist. Though looking at the commentary over at the Fanbox post, that was to be expected.
It's a resistor in a circuit. The number and color of the lines in it show strength, but if we could convey how resistant it is in a visible way, communication would be better. I wonder if I can say this strongly, or something like that. However, if I understood, I would be told various things with a strength that I could bear. I hate it.
I've drawn a few pictures dealing with electrical circuits in the past, but this was the first time I looked into the color of the resistor wires. I could imagine that it represented strength, but I didn't know the rules. Until now, I've been drawing with a sense of feeling, but I wonder if I would have been able to put a message in it if I had understood, or if someone who is familiar with it would have looked at me like "I don't understand." There's always something new to discover. I'm sure there are some things that I've forgotten instead, but let's take it positively because we think that we have the joy of discovering it again~.p
Having said this all, the proper guideline for these situations is always: "When in doubt, measure."
