voltage and current act in differently in conductance domain
Yes they act differently in analysis perspective, see below
You keep talking about "conductance domain", as if there is such a thing (there isn't). Also you previously said there is no such thing as KCL or KVL in "conductance domain", but of course there is. Those laws are universal, they don't depend on what nomenclature you use.
No I didn't claim that the KCL or KVL doesn't exist on "conductance domain", but I did say something like they do not exist in a way we are accustomed. The reason I removed it were that the claim is so bold and KVL and KCL are so central laws. I had no attention to pull these out at all (partly because I would make sure my logic is solid and shouldn't have any logic flaws or it this topic will be troll fest to ad nauseam), put the topic lives its own live. If we compare the KCL and KVL in these two "domains" or "planes", what ever you want to call the circuit models, the laws stay the same, but the object of the law (potential or current) will be swapped. KCL handless voltage and KVL current. This is pretty obvious when you look the parallel resistors and how we use conductance to calculate the equivalent of them.
The conductance domain is only model or an visualisation of the domain that conductance and the "law of conductance (I=G*U)" will form, if applied rigorously and R-domain circuit is converted to G-domain. I'm visual thinker so I like the less-abstract visual modeling.
Also, I notice you keep editing your earlier posts in the thread and changing your words. This makes it impossible to follow the thread since it is like shifting sands. If you want people to engage with you, please don't do that.
Yes, I tried to clarify some posts late yesterday evening as the subject is a bit odd , some would even say controversial. The KCL/KVL edit. were only one where I removed something.