It's basically the same as your other question and its answer.
In all your examples here, at indicates an instantaneous event (not related to anything leading up to that event) had an effect; from indicates that the effect stemmed from an existing or long-standing condition.
I became hungry at the smell of the cookies.
The smell of the cookies reached you and you became hungry (instantaneous).
I was exhausted from working all day.
Working all day is a long-standing condition, not instantaneous.
I got excited at the sight of her face.
You saw her face and in an instant became excited.
The last one is more interesting:
I'm broke from having spent all my money at the bar.
Although you could have spent all your money in one transaction, so that you instantaneously became penniless, the use of the continuous having spent means that the state of penury has continued since that time. Consequently you use from.
You could even make a more ambiguous case with
I'm broke from all the expenditure I incurred.
But the same analysis applies: you incurred all the expenditure, and an hour later you had still incurred all that expenditure. It's not the same as suddenly seeing someone or smelling cookies.
I think to answer this question, we need to distinguish between two different senses of experience. I quote from LDOCE:
- [U] knowledge or skill that you gain from doing a job or activity, or the process of doing this. It's about knowledge or skills
In this sense we can use of/in/with after experience to make noun phrases or gerund as in
You’ve got a lot of experience of lecturing.
my experience in many areas of the music business
in is often followed by a gerund. However noun phrases are also possible. 'Experience in' implies the person has been (professionally) trained in something (a special field of activity) as in
We need someone who has experience in marketing and teaching,
and after 'of', we mainly use gerund unless the word 'experience' is preceded by get/gain as in
The programme enables pupils to gain some experience of the world of work.
And afer with we tend to use noun phrases (persons/animals) and it implies that the knowledge has been gained about something by actual physical contact as in
I have experience with children.
Let's say this is said by a sister who raised his brother while his mom was always away working.
- [C] something that happens to you or something you do, especially when this has an effect on what you feel or think. It's about what happens.
In this sense we use of/with/for (Not in) after experience to make noun phrases as in
This was my first experience of living with other people.
In this sense, I think you can use both with and of interchangeably to make the same meaning as in
It was her first experience of/with dealing with people from another culture.
I assume you try to refer to loving someone simply as an event, or type of event, lived through which does not have the idea of gained knowledge. So, I think sentence two is the safest choice here. About number one (experience doing something) I found no reference to back it up so I think it's better to be avoided at least when formality matters. Many think of it as acceptable though as in
She has a great deal of experience (in) introducing new products to international markets.
Best Answer
The first question is simple; the meaning of the sentences is the same.
As for the second question, it is not necessary to use a preposition before the verb in this situation. The use of the preposition "on" comes from the idiom "to spend on". However, "to spend" works fine on its own, sometimes:
It's up to you whether or not you want to use "on" or not. In sentences 1 and 2, the idiom isn't used, so you don't need the preposition. In sentence 1 you are using a different preposition "to" with the infinitive to express purpose. In sentence 2, you're using a participial phrase.
In the end, they all sound a little redundant. I agree with TRomano's comment; cut it to just "He spent all that money on a house."